PERMANENT PEOPLES TRIBUNAL - INDICTMENT charging Gloria Arroyo by dfhdhdhdhjr

VIEWS: 219 PAGES: 110

									                       PERMANENT PEOPLES’ TRIBUNAL
                     Via della Dogana Vecchia, 5-00186 Rome – Italy

THE FILIPINO PEOPLE at the suit of
MAKABAYAN,                                        Second Session on the Philippines

                 - versus -
                                                  1. Gross       and    Systematic
                                                     Violations    of   Civil and
GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO,                             Political Rights
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES                          Extra-Judicial Killings,
and the FILIPINO INDIVIDUALS                         Abduction and
more particularly listed in the                      Disappearances, Massacre,
FIRST SCHEDULE hereto,                               Torture, etc;

                     And                          2. Gross      and     Systematic
                                                     Violations of Economic,
GEORGE WALKER BUSH, The                              Social and Cultural
GOVERNMENT OF THE UNITED                             Rights; And
                                                  3. Gross     and    Systematic
                     And                             Violations of the Right to
                                                     National Self-Determination
THE INTERNATIONAL MONETARY                           and Liberation


more particularly listed in the

Indictment                                                                           2

                               Prefatory Statement

      The Philippines is a rich country, with bountiful land, water and human
resources. But the Filipino people are poor and are groveling in poverty,
hardship, misery and oppression.

       For centuries, the social wealth created by the Filipino toiling people
has been unjustly appropriated, first by foreign colonizers and then by foreign
capital and their local agents, always through a combination of force and
deceit, and with the collaboration of the local elite. The Spaniards used the
spread of Christianity as a pretext for three centuries of feudal and
mercantilist exploitation and oppression of the Filipino people. The American
colonizers invoked “benevolent assimilation”, democratization and education
to conceal and sugarcoat its real goal of turning the Philippines into its military
outpost, source of raw materials and cheap labor, market for its products and
outlet for surplus capital. Both Spaniards and Americans ultimately resorted
mainly to coercion and brute force to subjugate the Filipino people who had
always, from the beginning, ferociously resisted foreign domination and

       To suit its imperialist design, the US has imposed on the Philippines,
since the turn of the 20th century to the present, a colonial pattern of trade that
stunted the growth of the Philippine economy, consigning it to its present
backward, agrarian, pre-industrial state. Roughly 75 percent of its population
are peasants, suffering under various forms of feudal and semi-feudal
exploitation and oppression. Big landlords (landlords owning more than 50
hectares), who constitute less than 1 percent of the population, or less than
20 percent of all landowners, own more than 80% of all agricultural land. Most
big landlords are themselves big compradors or merchant capitalists who are
the trading partners of foreign, mostly US, capital.

       Rather than allow the Filipino people to chart their own path to
progress and prosperity after granting the Philippines formal political
independence in 1946, the US imposed onerous and unequal military and
economic treaties and agreements such as the Military Bases Agreement
granting the US extraterritorial rights in vast tracts of rent-free land, the Mutual
Defense Pact, and the Parity Amendment on the 1935 Philippine Constitution
granting US nationals equal rights as Filipinos to exploit the country’s natural
resources and freely repatriate profits.

       The US has been able to do this because of the collaboration of a
ruling elite composed of the big landlords and big compradors whose political
and economic fortunes depend on total subservience to their US (imperialist)
masters. The series of governments from 1946 to the present have invariably
been characterized by puppetry to US imperialism, to the complete detriment
Indictment                                                                           3

of the interest of the Filipino people. Each government’s economic policies
were tailor-fit to benefit US and other foreign capital and their local comprador
agents. Philippine foreign policy never deviated from that of the US, including
sending Philippine troops to support US-led aggression and military
intervention such as in Korea and Vietnam.

       It is important to note that since the formation of the Philippine Scouts,
the precursor of the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), during the
American colonial period to the present, the AFP has been virtually controlled
and directed by the US, especially through the Joint US Military Advisory
Group (JUSMAG) which provides and supervises its military training and
doctrine, logistics, intelligence and planning.

       The 1960s saw the deteriorating political and socio-economic situation
brought about by foreign domination, economic stagnation, widespread
poverty, and a graft-ridden bureaucracy led by the greedy ruling elite.
Inevitably, this led to the revitalization and rapid upsurge of mass protest
actions nationwide calling for national sovereignty, genuine democracy and
social justice. Armed challenges to the Philippine government reemerged
when the re-established Communist Party of the Philippines formed the New
People’s Army in 1969 and the Moro National Liberation Front was formed in
1971 with its Bangsa Moro Army.

        Both deception and force were resorted to by the US-backed Philippine
government, led then by President Ferdinand Marcos, to coopt and suppress
the democratic and legal mass protest actions. The rabid anti-national, anti-
people and anti-democratic character of the Marcos government reared its
monstrous fascist head in 1972, when, to keep himself in power and acquire
more wealth, Marcos declared martial law. Not surprisingly, the US
government and foreign chambers of commerce immediately gave their
blessings to the dictatorship. This plunged the entire nation into fourteen (14)
dark years of full-blown dictatorship marked by widespread human rights
violations by state and paramilitary forces, criminal syndicates led by top AFP
and police generals, IMF-imposed structural adjustment programs favoring
foreign capital, spiraling prices of basic commodities, wage increase
moratoriums, greater landlessness under a bogus land reform program, and
unprecedented rampant graft, corruption and plunder of the economy by
multinationals in connivance with the Marcos clique.

      Rather than cow the people into submission and passivity, state
repression under martial rule merely fanned the flames of people’s resistance.
Legal mass protest actions, as well as armed resistance, spread over the
land. For a long time, the Marcos dictatorship managed to survive because it
was propped up by the US, loans from the IMF-WB and foreign capital.

      In 1980, the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) and
the Moro National Liberation Front (MNLF), acting in behalf of the Filipino
people and the Bangsa Moro people, appealed to the Permanent People’s
Tribunal (PPT) to examine the Philippine situation. After convening and
hearing the cases presented by the NDFP and MNLF from 30 October to 3
Indictment                                                                           4

November 1980, the PPT found the Marcos regime guilty of political
repression and blatant abuse of state powers, violation of the sovereign rights
of the Filipino people and the Bangsa Moro people and other grave and
numerous economic and political crimes. It also condemned the US
government and censured the IMF-WB and ADB, and foreign multinationals
and banks operating in the Philippines for supporting, encouraging and
sustaining the Marcos dictatorship for their own interest and in violation of the
sovereign rights of the Filipino and Bangsa Moro peoples.

       In February 1986, a military mutiny combined with a popular unarmed
uprising overthrew the Marcos dictatorship. The widely acclaimed “People
Power” uprising brought hopes for the restoration of democracy and a new
era of relative peace and prosperity in the Philippines. Unfortunately, this was
not to be so.

        While the formal democratic processes and structures such as
elections and the legislature were restored, anti-national and anti-people
policies and structures remained. The Aquino administration, led by the anti-
Marcos, anti-fascist faction of the ruling elite whose interests nonetheless
coincided with those of foreign capital, pursued the same economic policies
dictated by and favoring US and other foreign monopoly capital. Rather than
seize on the opportunity to institute basic and wide-ranging social, economic
and political reforms, the Aquino government and its foreign backers took
advantage of the post-Marcos euphoria and the anti-fascist image of Aquino
as a smokescreen to squelch and coopt the people’s clamor for change.
Repressive instrumentalities, statutes and measures were not repealed, such
as the criminalization of political offenses, warrantless arrests, dispersal of
protest actions, etc. Military campaigns and operations escalated and
intensified, resulting in widespread human rights violations by state and
paramilitary forces. In a short while the euphoria faded and the restiveness of
the people reemerged as the economic and political crises intensified.
Elements of the military, led by former military rebels as well as Marcos
loyalists in the military, attempted several coups d’etat against the Aquino

        The economy turned from bad to worse as the succeeding Ramos and
Estrada governments implemented more and more policies imposed by the
IMF-WB-WTO that opened up the Philippines’ resources wider to foreign
exploitation, destroyed local industries, caused increasing joblessness and
landlessness, and brought unprecedented hardship and misery to the Filipino
people. In 1994, then Senator Gloria Macapagal Arroyo sponsored the bill
and spearheaded the campaign to ratify the World Trade Organization (WTO)
treaty, making the Philippines a member of the WTO and subjecting it to the
destructive neoliberal policies of deregulation, liberalization, privatization and
de-nationalization. Ramos accelerated the economic crisis by granting huge
incentives and sovereign guarantees to foreign investors, and by running
ahead of WTO schedules in dismantling protective trade tariffs, investment
controls and currency controls. As a result, the economy became vulnerable
and suffered heavily under the speculative attacks that triggered the 1997
Indictment                                                                           5

Asian financial crisis, from which the Philippine economy never quite

       In an attempt to create even a semblance of political stability that was
needed to attract foreign investments, Ramos initiated peace negotiations
with armed opposition groups such as the military rebels, the CPP-NDFP-
NPA and the Moro secessionist movements. These negotiations resulted in a
memorandum of agreement with the military rebels in 1995, and a Final
Peace Accord with the Moro National Liberation Front in 1996. Negotiations
with the NDFP (representing the CPP and NPA) and the Moro Islamic
Liberation Front (MILF) were both on-and-off under the Ramos administration
over issues of sole political authority or sovereignty and the non-
implementation by the Ramos government of prior bilateral agreements.

        Unlike Ramos who won the presidency on a minority vote and needed
to protect his flanks by engaging in peace negotiations, his successor Estrada
won by a big majority over his electoral rivals. Banking on his apparent
popularity and the firm support of the US and of foreign capital, Estrada
recklessly junked the peace negotiations with the NDFP as well as the MILF.
Under Estrada in 1999, the Philippines entered into the Visiting Forces
Agreement (aka “status of forces agreement”) with the US, allowing US troops
in the Philippines and virtually granting them extraterritorial rights, reversing
the historic rejection by the Philippine Senate of the US-Philippines Friendship
Treaty and the dismantling of the US bases in the Philippines in 1991.
Estrada launched the counter-insurgency campaign “Oplan Makabayan”
(Operation Plan Patriot) against the NDFP starting July 1998, and waged an
“all-out-war” against the MILF in 2000. Heavy military spending drained the
national treasury already rendered bankrupt by the economic plunder under
the Ramos regime, resulting in even deeper economic crisis. This combined
in turn with subsequent exposes of rampant graft and corruption and
immorality in the Estrada administration to fuel another unarmed “people
power” uprising.

        “People Power 2” -- supported by a disaffected and alarmed big
business community, the dominant Roman Catholic hierarchy, and finally the
military – overthrew the Estrada government and catapulted Macapagal-
Arroyo to the presidency. Once again, an extra-constitutional exercise of
sovereign power by the people was allowed and supported by the powers-
that-be to remove a ruling section (faction) that had turned from a useful
instrument into a liability and source of embarrassment, and replace it with a
more effective one with a fresh mandate from the people.

        Once again, the people’s euphoria and celebration over the expulsion
of a corrupt, repressive and widely undesirable president turned out to be
short-lived. No sooner had Macapagal-Arroyo taken office when she
announced that her economic policies would continue to favor big business
and attract, rather than drive away, foreign capital. True enough, under the
Arroyo government, IMF-WB-WTO imposed policies and measures have
been dutifully implemented and accelerated, to the delight not only of foreign
capital but also of the local big landlords and compradors who share a fraction
Indictment                                                                           6

of their profits. Faced with unprecedented heavy government debt and deficit,
the Arroyo government resorted to increasing tax burdens (VAT and EVAT)
and drastic budget cuts on health, education and other social services while
increasing debt servicing and military spending and opening up Philippine
natural and human resources, such as mineral resources and manpower
resources, to foreign capital. The obvious Arroyo logic is that the way out of
the financial crisis is to impose more burdens and sacrifices on the people in
order to make the economy more palatable to foreign creditors and investors.

       True enough, as the PPT had warned in its 1980 verdict, the Marcos
dictatorship was replaced by a series of neocolonial governments dependent
on and subservient to US and other foreign interests.

        The shameless puppetry and obsequiousness of the Macapagal-
Arroyo government to the US came to the fore once more when, shortly after
the September 11, 2001 New York bombings, Macapagal-Arroyo declared the
Philippines’ total support for the US-led “global war on terror”. She
immediately offered Philippine troops, doctors and other professionals, and
the use of Philippine territory, air space and facilities by the US and its allies
for military actions against unnamed “terrorist” enemies and unnamed
regimes supposedly harboring these “terrorists”. In November 2002, the
Arroyo government signed the Mutual Logistics Support Arrangement (aka
“access and servicing agreement”) allowing the US unhampered access and
use of Philippine facilities for all its military needs and unspecified military
activities. The VFA and MLSA combined virtually turn the entire Philippines
into an unsinkable US military base, veritably a giant US aircraft carrier
strategically positioned in the middle of the South China Sea.

        Macapagal-Arroyo asked for, then welcomed, the US designation of
the CPP and NPA as “foreign terrorist organizations” and the NDFP chief
political consultant Prof. Jose Ma. Sison as a “terrorist” and actively
campaigned for their inclusion in the “terrorist” listing of the European Union
and other countries. She launched an “all-out war” against the CPP-NDFP-
NPA under the US-directed counter-insurgency campaign “Oplan Bantay
Laya” (Operation Plan Freedom Watch), suspended formal peace talks with
the NDFP, and used the “terrorist” tag to gain leverage to pressure the NDFP
into capitulation. At the same time, the US and Arroyo also played the
“terrorist” card on the MILF, alternately threatening and attacking the MILF
and offering it “socio-economic aid and rehabilitation” in exchange for a peace
agreement that acknowledges the authority of the Philippine government over
the Moro people and their ancestral domain and territory.

       Under US encouragement and direction and using as pretext the US
“war on terror”, the Arroyo government has not only intensified its “counter-
insurgency campaign” against the CPP-NDFP-NPA, it has also flagrantly
resorted to physically attacking the legal democratic movement since 2001.
Leaders and activists of progressive organizations have been harassed,
arrested without warrant, abducted and forced to disappear, as well as
summarily executed with a frequency and brutality exceeding that under
martial law. Finding her regime’s legitimacy under question after fraudulent
Indictment                                                                           7

elections in 2004, Macapagal-Arroyo further resorted to repressive measures
and expanded the targets to include the open and legal democratic movement
and the political opposition.

       The growing number of extrajudicial killings and other gross human
rights violations committed by the Arroyo government’s military and police
forces in the Philippines today cry out for justice. KARAPATAN (Alliance for
the Advancement of Peoples’ Rights) has documented since 2001 when Mrs.
Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo assumed the presidency more than 800 victims of
extra-judicial killings, not including more than 350 who survived assassination
attempts. At least 207 have been abducted and forcibly disappeared. Tens of
thousands have also become internal refugees as a result of military
operations, which include indiscriminate bombings and strafing of rural
communities, and Vietnam-vintage “hamleting” to depopulate “rebel-infested”
areas and “remove the water in which the fish swims”..

       These atrocities have been perpetrated systematically and relentlessly
for more than five years with hardly an utterance of concern, much less
condemnation, from Macapagal-Arroyo. In fact, she praised, promoted and
coddled the military commanders, including those with track records of
grievous human rights violations . As commander-in-chief, she publicly gave
both tacit and overt approval and encouragement to the military campaigns of
suppression. Those who perpetrate the atrocities enjoy the license to kill,
abduct, torture and massacre “enemies of the state” with impunity. The rapid
promotion and public acclamation accorded to the most vicious, ruthless and
outspoken proponent of the killings, Maj. Gen. Palparan by Macapagal-Arroyo
herself was the clearest proof that indeed, the killings were state policy.

       Oplan Bantay-Laya, the Arroyo government’s counter-insurgency
campaign launched in 2002, differs from its failed predecessors mainly in
targeting suspected civilian sympathizers and supporters of the CPP-NPA in
town and urban centers. The AFP, police and other government strategists
searching for the elusive key to victory over the three-decades old people’s
war have come to the conclusion that they have been too soft on the legal
democratic organizations. AFP documents and other official documents on
internal security stress now the need to conduct military operations not only
against the guerrilla forces in the countryside but also against the
aboveground, legal machinery that allegedly supports the armed revolutionary
movement. The AFP embarked on a “Target Research” program in 2004
aimed at an intelligence build-up, complete with quotas and timetables, on
progressive organizations and personalities tagged as “enemies of the state”
and marked for “neutralization’, a military euphemism for physical elimination.
Most of those assassinated, forcibly disappeared,tortured and massacred
were priority subjects of this “target research”.

        The Arroyo government’s intensified attacks on the people, marked by
the cold-blooded murder of unarmed political activists, church people,
journalists, lawyers and judges, teachers and human rights defenders
continue to multiply with impunity. These are motivated by Arroyo’s drive for
political survival and are in line with the US government’s “war on terror” and
Indictment                                                                           8

the economic interest of multinational corporations in the Philippines. This
explains why the Arroyo government has not lifted a finger to render justice to
the victims of human rights violations, and to address the violations of the
people’s social, economic, cultural rights, as well as the violations of the
Filipino people’s sovereignty and right to self-determination. Taking a cue
from the US-led global war on terror and emboldened and encouraged by the
US government, the Arroyo government estimates it can also justify, gloss
over or cover up, in the name of counter-terrorism, violations of human rights,
international humanitarian law, and international law.

       Well-documented cases of human rights violations have already been
brought to the attention of the United Nations through its offices in New York
and Geneva. A number of international entities have also conducted fact-
finding missions and have issued reports, recommendations and
condemnations of the regime’s lack of resolute action to stop the killings.
Among these international groups are the Amnesty International, International
Parliamentarians’ Union, Asian Human Rights Commission, the International
Labor Solidarity Mission, the International Peasants Fact Finding Mission, the
Hong Kong Fact-Finding Mission to the Philippines, Reporters Sans Frontiers,
a delegation of church leaders led by the World Council of Churches and the
Christian Conference of Asia, Lawyers without Borders and Lawyers for
Lawyers from the Netherlands, International Association of Democratic
Lawyers, International Association of People’s Lawyers, and four women
lawyers from the United States.

        Various church organizations like the World Council of Churches,
Christian Conference of Asia, World Alliance of Reformed Churches, World
Methodist Council, Episcopal Church of the USA, Uniting Church of Australia,
United Church of Canada, United Methodist Church of the USA, United
Evangelical Mission of Germany and the National Council of Churches in
Japan have likewise issued their statements and resolutions calling on the
Manila government to bring an end to the killings. Notably, a number of
Members of Parliament from Europe and a number of officials from other
countries have also expressed their concerns over the deteriorating human
rights situation in the Philippines. The list continues to lengthen.

       In response to this growing international pressure, Macapagal-Arroyo
belatedly saw the need to take a pro-forma official action by creating the Melo
Commission in September 2006 to look into the killings. This step was clearly
intended to deflect and diffuse the barrage of criticisms against her
government. But before this Commission could start its investigation, Mrs.
Arroyo issued a blanket statement absolving her military and police forces of
any wrongdoing, despite testimonies from survivors and witnesses to the
contrary. As expected, the Melo Commission, in the report it had recently
submitted to President Arroyo, cleared her and the AFP top brass of any
responsibility, instead blaming the killings on Gen. Palparan and a “small
group” of rogue military and police elements, as well as gangsters and even
the New People’s Army. Curiously, Malacanang adamantly refused to release
the Melo Commission report to the public until it had to give in to both
international and local pressure to do so.
Indictment                                                                           9

        Nearly simultaneous with the submission and eventual release of the
Melo Commission report was the statement of Philip Alston, the UN Special
Rapporteur on Extra-judicial killings, on his findings after a 10-day visit. Mr.
Alston met with the representatives of the government, including top Cabinet,
military and police officials, human rights groups and relatives of victims of
extra-judicial killings. In his press statement, Mr. Alston rejected the various
government, military and police “theories” that absolved them from any
responsibility in the killings. While he said it was clear to him that the killings
are not state policy and are not centrally directed, Alston nonetheless
attributed some of the killings to the government’s counter-insurgency
program and indicated he would examine this in greater detail in his final
report. Despite the findings of Mr. Alston and the Melo Commission attributing
political killings to the AFP, Arroyo reiterated her earlier statement absolving
the military of the crimes and declaring that “99.9% of the AFP is good”.

       The struggle to uphold and defend human rights and the peoples’
rights continues. The Filipino people have shown that they cannot be cowed
by terror nor duped by the Arroyo regime. They persist in seeking and finding
avenues to make this despicable situation known throughout the world, to
seek justice, and gather the broadest support for their just and legitimate
struggle for national self-determination and social emancipation.

     It is with this aim and hope that we file our case today at the
Permanent People’s Tribunal.


       This is an indictment brought by the Filipino People – the peasants,
workers, women, youth & students, urban poor, fisherfolk, indigenous people,
migrant workers, church people, lawyers, journalists, teachers, government
employees, health workers, artists and other professionals, human rights
workers – in solidarity with other oppressed and exploited peoples of the
world, through the following people’s organizations:

HUSTISYA, an organization of friends and relatives of victims of human rights
violations under the US-Arroyo Regime;

DESAPARECIDOS, an organization of families and friends of victims of
enforced disappearances since the martial law years up to the present;

SELDA, an association of former political detainees from the martial law years
up to the present; and

BAGONG ALYANSANG MAKABAYAN (New Patriotic Alliance), a
nationwide, multisectoral alliance of progressive people’s organizations,
hereinafter referred to as the “Complainants”.
Indictment                                                                         10

        This Indictment is against the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines, its President, GLORIA MACAPAGAL-ARROYO, and the
Filipino individuals listed in the First Schedule hereto, the Government of the
United States of America, its President, GEORGE WALKER BUSH JR., the
International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade
Organization (WTO), and the Multinational Corporations (MNCs) and
Foreign Banks doing business in the Philippines listed in the Second
Schedule hereto, hereinafter referred to as the “Defendants”.


       The Defendants are hereby charged by the Filipino people of the

   I.        Gross and systematic violations of civil and political rights. These
             include extrajudicial killings/summary execution, abduction and
             enforced disappearances, massacre, torture, illegal arrest and
             detention, forced dislocation of communities and other human rights

   II.       Gross and systematic violations of economic, social and cultural
             rights of the Filipino people; and

   III.      Gross and systematic violations of the rights of the people to
             national self-determination and liberation

          The aforesaid acts and omissions violate:

   a.        The Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples (The Algiers
             Declaration of July 1976);
   b.        The Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 10 December 1948;
   c.        The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights of 16
             December 1966;
   d.        The International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural
             Rights of 16 December 1966;
   e.        The United Nations Convention against Torture;
   f.        The GRP-NDFP Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human
             Rights and International Humanitarian Law;
   g.        The 1996 GRP-MNLF Peace Agreement; and
   h.        The generally accepted principles of international law which form
             part of the laws of the Philippines under Section 2, Article II of the
             1987 Philippine Constitution
Indictment                                                                         11



                      General and specific allegations
               of gross violations of civil and political rights.

       From the time Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo came to power on January 21,
2001 up to November 2006, there have been a total of 6,990 cases of human
rights violations victimizing 396,099 individuals recorded and documented by
KARAPATAN, a human rights alliance.

        From 2001 to the present, there have been 834 documented cases of
extrajudicial killings, with 357 more cases of frustrated assassinations, i.e., the
victim or intended victim survived the attempt on their lives. At least 198
persons have been forcibly disappeared and remain missing to this day, most
of them already presumed dead. Hundreds have been tortured while tens of
thousands have been harassed and displaced from their homes and farms,
and have experienced physical and psychological assault in the course of
military operations or while exercising their rights to assembly and free

        The targeted victims are peasant leaders, union leaders and members
of farmers and workers’ organizations, human rights workers, judges and
lawyers, journalists, priests and church workers including a former Supreme
Bishop of the Philippine Independent Church. Most were uniformly subjected
to anti-communist slander, villification and demonization, and death threats by
the military before they were physically attacked.

      The intensifying political repression is being done with utmost brutality
and impunity. From January 2006 to February 8, 2007 alone, 148 leaders,
members and supporters of different mass organizations and party-list groups
were summarily killed throughout the country;

       Witnesses point to the police, military and paramilitary forces as the
perpetrators of the killings, disappearances, torture, illegal arrests and
detention and other violations;

       The killings are concentrated in Southern Tagalog, Central Luzon, Bicol
region, Eastern Visayas, the Ilocos and Cordillera regions. These are the
regions identified in Oplan Bantay Laya as “priority areas” and where
“counter-insurgency” military operations are most intense and sustained.

       The commission of the violations is centrally directed, showing a clear
pattern and practice based on the state policy of deliberate terror;
Indictment                                                                         12

       Specifically, the following illustrative and highlighted cases-- chosen
from among seventy case files of summary execution or extrajudicial killing,
abduction and involuntary disappearances, massacre, torture, illegal arrest
and detention, forced dislocation of communities and other violations of
human rights in the Philippines since Pres. Gloria Arroyo assumed the
presidency on 21 January 2001-- show the breadth and depth and the
heinousness and unmatched impunity with which violations of human rights
as well as general principles of international law have been perpetrated by the
Defendants in concert with each other.


       The Hacienda Luisita Massacre

       On November 6, 2004, in Hacienda Luisita, a sprawling sugarcane
estate in Tarlac City covering more than 6,400 hectares and owned by the
Cojuangco-Aquino clan, the workers therein belonging to United Luisita
Workers’ Union (ULWU) and the Central Azucarera de Tarlac Labor Union
(CATLU) simultaneously declared a strike to compel the management/owners
to heed their legitimate economic demands, such as increase in wages and
better terms and conditions of employment. ULWU also demanded the
reinstatement of the illegally dismissed officers and members of the union.
Their strike also exposed the fraudulent scheme adopted by the management
to deprive the farm worker-beneficiaries of their right to land through the
deceptive Stock Distribution Option (SDO) instead of distributing it to them
pursuant to the avowed land-for-the-landless policy of the state as provided
under the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. By a combination of
misrepresentation and intimidation, the management was able to impose the
SDO scheme on the farm workers and peasants in the hacienda. It promised
to them that the SDO would improve their lives. In reality, though, the scheme
has further impoverished them.

      Officers and members of ULWU believe that their filing of a petition in
2003 seeking the revocation/nullification of the SDO in Hacienda Luisita may
have been the reason for the union busting and the illegal dismissal of the
farm workers.

       On November 6, 7 and 15, 2004, despite the peaceful strike of the
workers, hundreds of police officers attempted to break up the picket line
using tear gas, water cannon, truncheons and later firearms, which seriously
injured many strikers.

        Despite the threat of an impending bloody dispersal, the strikers stood
their ground. On the other hand, though, President Macapagal-Arroyo and
her government simply turned a cold shoulder to the plight of the striking
workers. Her deafening silence was interpreted as acquiescence to the police
violence in Hacienda Luisita. Worse, her alter ego at the Department of Labor
and Employment (DOLE), Secretary Patricia Sto. Tomas, issued an
Assumption of Jurisdiction (AJ) Order on November 10, 2004. Although it
was issued solely against CATLU, curiously, said AJ was forcibly served upon
Indictment                                                                         13

ULWU. More strangely, the Labor Secretary deputized not only the police but
also the Armed Forces in the supposed full implementation of the AJ.

        To avert further violence against the strikers, in the morning of
November 16, 2004, the respective officers of ULWU and CATLU went to the
Makati residence of former Congressman Peping Cojuangco, a co-owner of
Hacienda Luisita.        Their purpose was to negotiate with the former
congressman and his wife to spare the people from the looming violent and
bloody dispersal of the strike as enunciated in the AJ. Insisting that the
ULWU officers no longer had any personality to talk with them because they
were deemed dismissed, Mr. Cojuangco and his wife denied the ULWU
officers entry into their house.

        No agreement was reached during the negotiation. Mr. Cojuangco
stood firm on his stance to leave the matter to the decision of the DOLE.
Thus, the union officers went back to the picket lines in Hacienda Luisita. At
that time, hundreds of PNP elements and AFP soldiers in full battle gear were
already deployed inside the sugar mill compound. Positioned along with them
were two armored personnel carriers (APCs), two pay loaders and four fire
trucks. Only the steel gate at Gate 1 of the sugar mill separated the combined
military and police forces from the strikers.

        Immediately thereafter and without any negotiation between the
strikers and the dispersal teams taking place first, the latter assaulted the
strikers. The dispersal teams blasted the strikers with water from the fire
trucks, which stung their skin. They also lobbed the strikers with tear gas.
Unsuccessful in their attempt to crush the picket line, the dispersal teams
commandeered an APC that pounded upon the steel gate. When it had
smashed open the gate, the people started throwing stones or anything they
could put their hands on at the APC to thwart its attempt to disperse them.
Having caused the APC to retreat, the people lifted their hands in jubilation,
only to get shocked shortly thereafter by successive gunshots indiscriminately
fired upon them. Every one scampered and ran for cover. In just a moment,
seven strikers lay dead while a number of others sustained severe gunshot
wounds. A little while later, more than a hundred other strikers were illegally
arrested and arbitrarily detained en masse by the military and the police, not
sparing a woman who was seven months pregnant.

        The violent massacre did not put an end to the gross violations of the
rights of the striking workers. On the contrary, the Cojuangco-Aquino family,
in conspiracy with the military, the police, the paramilitary groups such as the
Civilian Armed Forces Geographical Units (CAFGU), and other hired
agents/gunmen, has continued to harass, threaten and violate the rights of the
hacienda people.

      On the night of December 8, 2004, Marcelino Beltran, himself a
peasant and a key witness to the massacre, was brutally murdered in his
home in a remote village in Tarlac.
Indictment                                                                         14

       On the night of January 5, 2005, hacienda workers George Loveland
and Ernesto Ramos were fatally injured when still unidentified bodyguards of
Rep. Benigno “Noynoy” Aquino, who were armed, attacked them at the picket
point outside Las Haciendas gate.

        On March 3, 2005, Abelardo Ladera, a duly elected councilor in Tarlac
City, a member of Bayan Muna and a staunch supporter of the strike, was
shot dead by a single bullet in the chest while he was buying some spare
parts for his automobile.

      On March 13, 2005, Fr. William Tadena of the Philippine Independent
Church, who also strongly supported the plight of the strikers, was likewise
gunned down after officiating mass in his parish in La Paz, Tarlac.

     Thereafter, another peasant strongly supporting the strikers, Victor
Concepcion, was likewise summarily executed in his house.

        In the nighttime of October 25, 2005, while resting after personally
distributing the unpaid earned wages and benefits of the sugar mill workers,
Ricardo Ramos, president of CATLU and village chairman of one of the
barangays located inside the hacienda, was brutally gunned down near his

        Villages in the hacienda have become heavily militarized. Many
villagers have complained of being subjected to illegal arrest. Others have
been unjustly suspected of being NPA members and are being forced to
admit and sign rebel returnee’s papers.

        At 2 a.m. of November 14, 2005, strikers manning the picket point in
Brgy. Balete were mauled and seized by elements of the 48th Infantry
Battalion under the command of Maj. Gen. Jovito Palparan who was then
chief of the 7th Infantry Division. Eleven of the strikers were illegally and
forcibly taken to a safe house where they were interrogated. Three of them
were subsequently charged with illegal possession of firearms on the basis of
planted evidence.

        Rene Galang, president of ULWU, and his family have been principally
targeted by the military and the police. Several elements of the military have
virtually maintained a detachment in a house just across his residence. They
would ask around about his whereabouts. In addition, on or about September
26, 2005, they broke into his house. His wife was slapped in the face by the
military for having told the people about the break-in by these soldiers. Even
his children experienced harassment and intimidation by the military while at

      On March 17, 2006, around midnight, another officer of ULWU, Tirso
Cruz, was murdered in cold blood by the military near his house inside the
Indictment                                                                         15

       Remarkably, all throughout the struggle of the workers and their
families, Macapagal-Arroyo maintained almost complete silence and showed
her utter lack of concern over the issues confronting the people. Only once
did she issue a statement, at the prodding of the CBCP, hypocritically hoping
for a peaceful resolution ot the conflict at Hacienda Luisita. To the Hacienda
workers and farmers, the president’s cold response amounted to tacit
approval of the continuing unlawful aggression committed by the military,
police and paramilitary forces, in collusion with the hacienda owners, against
the poor working people in the hacienda.

       On January 13, 2005, ULWU and CATLU and the victims of the
Hacienda Luisita massacre filed criminal cases for multiple murder and
multiple frustrated murder, among others, against the owners of the hacienda,
the numerous military and police officers who perpetrated and ordered the
violent dispersal of the otherwise peaceful strike, and Sec. Patricia Sto.
Tomas. To date, however, the Office of the Ombudsman, before which the
cases were filed, has sat on their bounden duty to investigate and prosecute
these cases.

        The Philippine National Police, feigning an impartial and unbiased
investigation into the incident, likewise came up with its report of its
investigation which, expectedly, absolved the state forces, save for less than
a handful low-ranking police officers.

       The victims of the massacre and their relatives and supporters have
already brought this case to the attention of the local Commission on Human
Rights, the United Nations and other international fora. It has also been the
subject of legislative inquiries in the two chambers of the Philippine Congress.
After more than two years and despite efforts of the victims and their relatives
and supporters to seek justice, the Office of the Ombudsman is yet to act
upon their petition.

       Massacre of Farmers in Palo, Leyte

       The San Agustin Farmer Beneficiaries Multi-purpose Cooperative
(SFBMC) is composed of more or less 60 farmer-members in Brgy. San
Agustin, Palo, Leyte.

       Sometime in June 2004, the members of the cooperative - Rene
Margallo, Renato Dizon, Fe Muriel, Bernabe Burra, Francisco Cobacha and
Ariel Santiso sought help from the cooperative regarding the landgrabbing by
Pedro Margallo of their respective lands.

       The Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) has already rendered a
decision in favor of the 6 farmer-members but Pedro Margallo still insisted on
taking possession of the land.

      SFBMC member Bernabe Burra sought help from Bayan Muna-Metro
Tacloban Chapter. When Bayan Muna positively responded, the members of
Indictment                                                                         16

the cooperative decided to schedule a “balik-uma” (return-to-the-land) on the
land awarded to the farmers by the DAR and help the 6 farmers till their lands.

       The members of SFBMC set the “balik-uma” on November 21, 2005.
In the evening of November 20, 2005, the farmers who would be participating
in the “balik-uma” were already in the “kamalig” or make-shift hut owned by
the father of Rene Margallo to make preparations for the early morning
planting activities. The “kamalig” was near the land to be tilled by the farmers.

        At around 5 a.m. of November 21, 2005, more or less 50 farmers were
gathered in the “kamalig.” It is the practice of farmers to invite neighboring
villages at the opening of the planting season and this is usually met with a
feast; thus, other farmers from Brgy. Teraza and Capirawan and farmer-
members of the Alang-alang Small Farmers Association (ASFA) based in the
nearby Alang-alang, Leyte joined the “balik-uma”.

       Some of the farmers were already awake cooking their food and
having coffee when, without any warning, they were peppered with gunfire by
men wearing ski masks that almost covered their faces. The farmers shouted
out they were unarmed civilians but these were ignored and instead, the
armed men continued to fire their guns. Five hand grenades were also
thrown at them.

      As a result, eight farmers died including Alma Bartoline who was seven
months pregnant. More than ten were injured.

       When the firing stopped, the armed men who were in full-battle gear
approached the “kamalig.” They were members of the 19th Infantry Battalion
of the Philippine Army. They ordered the farmers to lie face-down and
stepped on the farmers’ back, forcing them to admit they were members of
the NPA.

        The soldiers insisted that the farmers are members and sympathizers
of the NPA, and were concealing some firearms. When the farmers denied
the allegations and explained that they are plain and simple farmers and were
unarmed, a soldier came with a sackful of firearms and “subversive”
documents and insisted that these belonged to the farmers.

       The farmers pleaded for immediate medical attention but the soldiers

        Col. Louie Dagoy admitted that members of the 19th IB of the
Philippine Army carried out the attack but claimed that this was a legitimate
military operation.

        What the soldiers perpetrated was a cold-blooded massacre of
innocent farmers not an encounter between the military and the NPA as
falsely claimed by the military authorities in their official statements. It was
clearly pre-meditated, as evidenced by the fact that the soldiers had prepared
Indictment                                                                         17

a sackful of old firearms and “subversive documents” to be planted at the
scene of the crime.

       To justify their actions and cover up their heinous crime, the 19th IB PA
filed charges of illegal possession of low-powered firearms against nine
farmers who survived the massacre, arrested and detained them. Another
case of illegal possession of high-powered firearms was filed at the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) in Tacloban City. Unable to post bail, the farmers remain
detained at the Kauswagan Provincial Jail.

        While under detention, they continue to receive death threats. One of
them, Joselito Tobe, a member of Concerned Citizens for Justice and Peace
and Bayan Muna Party-list died while in detention. The Kauswagan Provincial
Jail authorities alleged that he suffered a stroke. But the relatives and friends
of Joselito Tobe are not convinced considering that two (2) weeks prior to his
death, Tobe informed his relatives and friends that he and his co-detainee
Arnel Dizon had received death threats.

       Due to the financial support generated by various human rights groups,
two of the farmers who have been receiving death threats while in detention
were released on bail.

        On October 3, 2006, the Regional Trial Court of Tacloban, Leyte
dismissed the case of illegal possession of high-powered firearms. They are
still awaiting the decision of the Municipal Trial Court in the other case.

     Counter-charges are being prepared by the farmers against the
members of the 19th IB, Philippine Army.


       The case of Rev. Andy Pawican

       On May 21, 2006, Pastor Andy Pawican of the United Church of Christ
of the Philippines (UCCP)-Pantabangan was on his way home to Sitio
Maasip, Barangay Tayabo, San Jose City from Sunday worship in Sitio
Maluyon, Barangay Fatima, Pantabangan, Nueva Ecija. He was with his wife,
Dominga Pawican, their eight-month-old baby, his mother-in-law Maria
Binlingan and a neighbor named Bernadette Tayaban.

       About 200 meters before reaching their house, they were stopped by
three soldiers in uniform belonging to the 48th Infantry Battalion which is under
the command of the 7th Infantry Division of the Philippine Army.

        The soldiers ordered Pastor Andy Pawican to stay allegedly because
they wanted to discuss something with him. Thus, Maria Binlingan, Dominga
Pawican and Bernadette Tayaban went ahead while Pastor Andy, who was
carrying his eight month-old baby, stayed behind.
Indictment                                                                         18

       At around 2:30 p.m., several shots of gunfire were heard from the
place where Pastor Andy was held by the army soldiers.

       Several minutes later, a soldier came to the house of Dominga
Pawican carrying Pastor Andy’s eight month-old baby, her shirt stained with
blood and with a scratch on her face. It was then that the family of Pastor
Andy learned that he was shot to death by the soldiers for allegedly being a
supporter of the New People’s Army and for allegedly fighting back at the

       The relatives and friends of Pastor Andy were not allowed to go near
his body which was heavily guarded by military soldiers until the following day.

        On May 22, 2006, residents of barangays Fatima and Tayabo, namely,
Blacio Binlingan (father-in-law of Pastor Andy), Roger Binlingan, Mempe Ruiz,
Marlon Talac, Mariano Muling, Pastor Sebio Guindayan, Carlito Hongduan,
Telio Palting, Paredes Baguilat, Anton Balectad, Fidel Palting and Ruel
Marcial went to Sitio Maasip, Brgy. Tayabo upon the plea of spouses Paredes
and Estela Baguilat to accompany them back to their house in Brgy. Tayabo,
Nueva Ecija. The spouses were among the residents of Brgy. Tayabo who
fled their homes when the military soldiers started firing their guns.

       On their way to Brgy. Tayabo, they saw the body of Pastor Andy being
guarded by more or less sixty soldiers led by Lt. Ariel Galado and Lt. Freddie
Lobusta of the 48th IB, 7th Infantry Division of the Philippine Army. The
residents saw a gunshot wound on the head of Pastor Andy, his arms heavily
bruised and bore cigarette burns, his eyes swollen with a heavy black-eye and
his feet twisted. He was still wearing the barong tagalog he wore during the
Sunday mass.

       When the soldiers saw the residents, they asked them where they
were going and if they were supporters of the NPA. They noticed Fidel
Palting who had long hair and asked him if he was a member of the NPA.
Under duress, he was forced to lie and say that he was a member of the NPA.
The soldiers also forced him to point to other members of the NPA. Fidel
Palting was forced to say that Ruel Marcial, his first cousin, was an NPA

       The soldiers asked the residents to carry the body of Pastor Andy to
Brgy. Tayabo, San Jose City. They were escorted by more or less twenty

       Upon reaching Brgy. Tayabo, the remains of Pastor Andy was boarded
on a six by six military truck. The soldiers ordered Blacio Binlingan, Mempe
Ruiz and Marvin Palting to bring the corpse to Funeraria Ilagan in San Jose
City. The other residents were ordered to go home.

       Fidel Palting and Ruel Marcial were, however, ordered by the military
soldiers to stay. They were forcibly brought to the Sto. Niño Camp 2nd in San
Indictment                                                                         19

Jose City which is the headquarters of the 48th Infantry Battalion under the
leadership of Lt. Col. Joselito Kakilala. The 48th IB is a component of the 7th
Infantry Division of the Philippine Army which is under the command of Maj.
Gen. Jovito Palparan.

       The abduction and torture of Ruel Marcial

       Ruel Marcial is a farmer from Aritao, Nueva Viscaya and a member of
the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP).

       After the body of Pastor Andy was brought to Funeraria Ilagan, the
other residents of Brgys. Fatima and Tayabo were ordered to go home,
except for Fidel Palting and Ruel Marcial,

        Palting was forced to ride on a motorcycle with a soldier. When the
motorcycle returned, Marcial was also told to board the same motorcycle. He
was later transferred to a waiting L300 van. Marcial was blindfolded,
handcuffed and brought to a place he later learned to be Sto. Nino Camp, a
military camp in San Jose City.

       Inside the camp, while Marcial was still blindfolded and handcuffed, his
shorts and briefs were removed. He was subjected to interrogation. He was
forced to admit being a member of the NPA. He was asked, “Where are your
comrades?”; “Where are they keeping their guns?” Whenever Marcial replied
he was not a member of the NPA, physical assault and torture were inflicted
on him for two straight days.

         He was kicked on his left shoulder and neck. He was punched on his
left shoulder and abdomen. He was beaten using a wooden bat on both arms
and the lower parts of his body especially his buttocks. His skin on the lower
left thigh was pinched with mechanical pliers. A lighted cigarette was pressed
on his legs. He was burned on his legs and lower parts of his body with a
flaming wooden stick.

        During the interrogation, the soldiers were drunk. Marcial was also
forced to drink liquor. His captors tried to burn his nose with a lighter. With
bullets inserted between his fingers, his hands were squeezed. His anus was
pricked with the pointed tip of a bolo or knife.

        The torture was inflicted continually. Marcial was not allowed to sleep
nor rest. He was threatened he would be killed. His captors inserted cogon
grass and stalks into his penis. At times during the interrogation, he was
made to lie down and remove his blindfold but his eyes were rubbed with salt.
His captors also forced open his mouth, poured water in and tried to drown
him. They also choked Marcial with a rope. The nails of his big toes and the
2nd digit of his left fool were pried off using a bolo. The soldiers also cut his
hair using a knife or a bolo and removed part of his scalp on the back of his
head. Unable to bear the pain and horror of torture by the soldiers, Marcial
was forced to declare that he was a member of the NPA and that he was
Indictment                                                                         20

willing to cooperate to find the rebels’ camp. Thereafter, in the course of the
physical and psychological torture, Marcial lost consciousness.

        When he woke up, his foot was bound to a post with a metal chain. His
blindfold was removed. From then on, he was allowed to sleep and the
soldiers fed him. He was held captive for more than one month.

       While Marcial never saw Palting inside the camp, he surmises that
Palting was in one of the huts in the camp because he saw soldiers guarding
a hut and bringing food.

      On July 7, 2006, while the soldier assigned to guard Marcial left for a
few minutes to get food for their supper and while only a few soldiers were in
the camp at that time, Marcial was able to free himself using a big nail to
remove the lock of the metal chain that bound his foot. He ran away from the
camp and walked in the forest for about 2 days. He sought help from a friend
who brought him to a safe place.

        While Marcial was brought to a sanctuary, a petition for habeas corpus
was being prepared by the family of Fidel Palting. Before they could file the
petition, however, the military surfaced Palting and brought him back home.
Palting was seen holding a handheld radio and cell phone apparently given by
the military requiring him to report to the military. To date, Marcial fears for his
life and continues to stay in a sanctuary.

       The case of Rev. Isaias Sta. Rosa

         On 3 August 2006 at around 10:35 p.m., Pastor Isaias Sta. Rosa was
abducted and then murdered in Brgy. Malobago, Daraga, Albay by armed
men wearing bonnets, at least one of whom was positively identified as a

        Isaias Sta. Rosa was a member of Legaspi City United Methodist
Church in South Bicol District, a freelance writer, project consultant for non-
government organizations and Executive Director of the Farmers’ Assistance
for Rural Management Education and Rehabilitation, Inc., a non-government
organization that gives assistance to farmers in improving their economy. He
was also an active member of the peasant group Kilusang Magbubukid ng
Bikol (Bicol Peasant Movement), an affiliate organization of the Kilusang
Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (Philippine Peasant Movement) which is active in the
fight for genuine land reform and calls for the ouster of President Gloria

       At around 7:30 p.m. of August 3, 2006, three (3) hooded armed men
who, except for one who appeared to be the leader and was wearing a
maroon shirt and black short pants, were all wearing army-issued camouflage
pants, combat boots and dark long-sleeved t-shirts, barged into the house of
brothers Ray-Sun and Jonathan Sta. Rosa. The armed men were looking for
their brother Pastor Isaias Sta. Rosa. They were told to lay prone on the
Indictment                                                                         21

ground while the armed men stepped on their heads and poked their guns on
them. Ray was able to observe the presence of more armed men positioned
amidst the bushes. Jonathan was hit with a gun barrel on his head when he
tried to look around.

      They then accused the two brothers of being members of the New
People’s Army, which the two denied. Thereafter, Jonathan was dragged at
gunpoint to the house of his brother Pastor Sta. Rosa situated just a few
meters from his own house.

      Sonia, the wife of Pastor Sta. Rosa, heard a commotion outside their
house. She peeped through one of their windows to check but she did not
see anything. At that time, Isaias Sta. Rosa and children Demdem, Philip and
Mikko were also inside the house.

        They heard a knock on the door and Sonia heard the soft voice of
Jonathan calling Isaias. She opened the door and saw Jonathan looking pale.
As Sonia was calling out Isaias, a short stout man wearing a ski mask, a
maroon t-shirt and short pants, and armed with a .45 cal. pistol barged inside
their house and ordered them to drop to the floor. The armed stout man was
followed by about six to ten similarly armed men who were hooded with ski
masks, wearing black t-shirts, camouflaged pants and combat boots. Isaias
Sta. Rosa was then immediately tied with his hands at the back. He was
mauled while he was being forced to admit that he was the “Elmer” that they
were looking for and that he had a gun.

       They herded Jonathan, Sonia, Dem-dem, Mikko, Philip and Ray into
one of the rooms while Isaias was brought to the other room. The soldiers
then left the house taking with them Isaias, who was still tied and bloodied.
His laptop computer and cellular phones were taken from him.

       Sonia rushed outside and called for help from her sister Madelyn, who
lives near their house. The neighbors were stirred as Madelyn shouted for
help. A few minutes later, gunshots were heard – six shots, a pause, then
another three shots.

       Ray, Jonathan and their neighbors immediately went to the direction
where the gunshots came. There they found the body of Isaias Sta. Rosa
along a creek about 50 meters away from his house.

        They also found another dead body, with the face covered by a
bonnet, wearing a maroon shirt and shorts about five meters away from the
body of Isaias, along with a .45 caliber pistol fitted with a sound suppressor or
silencer. He was the same man who led the armed group that abducted

        Afterwards, a group of policemen led by Colonel Capinpin, the chief of
Daraga Police Station, arrived along with the barangay chief, Artita Padilla.
The police recovered from the scene the pistol as well as one spent shell for
.45 caliber pistol and one .45 caliber slug. Also recovered by the police from
Indictment                                                                         22

the then unidentified body were a Philippine Army identification card of one
Private First Class Lordger Pastrana with expiration date of 9 December
2008, and a mission order issued in the same name by the 9th Military
Intelligence Battalion of the 9th Infantry Division, Philippine Army, based in
Camp Weene Martillana, Pili, Camarines Sur. The mission order is signed by
Major Ernest Marc Rosal and bears the effectivity date 11 July 2006 until 30
September 2006.

      The other dead body was later identified to be that of Pfc Lordger
Pastrana of the Military Intelligence of the 9th Infantry Division.

      Autopsy reports showed that Isaias Sta. Rosa died after sustaining six
gunshot wounds while Pastrana sustained one gunshot wound.

      Immediately after the killing of Isaias Sta. Rosa, the police quickly
announced it through media to be a case of robbery with homicide.

        However, on 24 August 2006, the regional office of the Philippine
Commission on Human Rights released its Initial Investigation Report
positively countering the theory of the police, stating thus:

       It is evident that there is legal ground to prosecute the army
   soldiers in the company of Cpl. Lordger Pastrana for murder as this
   case would not contemplate robbery with homicide, but one of
   murder in view of the mission order found in Pastrana’s possession
   and the prior incident of assault upon the household of Sta. Rosa’s
   neighbor, Alwin Mirabuna, wherein these armed suspects inquired
   the whereabouts of Isaias Sta. Rosa, a person possible subject of
   the secret mission. Since the identity of the suspects cannot be
   ascertained, it is recommended that the Commanding Officer in the
   above-cited mission order be legally made answerable under the
   principle of command responsibility governing military conduct.

       The military and the police did not conduct further investigation on the
case. The military also refused to reveal any relevant data, such as the
names of the team members of Pastrana. The military and the police tried to
cover-up the case by declaring that Pastrana was on Absence Without Leave
(or AWOL) and that he was in the place to woo somebody. The PNP on the
other hand declared that the case is a simple case of robbery with homicide.

       In the meantime, Sonia and her children are now living in constant
fear, while Ray and Jonathan had to move out of their barangay. Sonia is
also scared of filing a case in court because of the threat of retaliation from
the perpetrators.
Indictment                                                                         23

       The case of Eddie Gumanoy and Eden Marcellana

        Eden Marcellana, then Secretary General of KARAPATAN-Southern
Tagalog; and Mr. Eddie Gumanoy, Chairman of KASAMA-TK, a peasant
organization in Southern Tagalog, led a fact-finding team of 11 persons to
Gloria, Mindoro Oriental on April 19-21, 2003 to investigate cases of human
rights violations in that area.

        On April 21, on their way back to Calapan City after their fact finding
investigation, the passenger van the group was riding was blocked by armed
men, some of whom were wearing military uniforms, at the town of Naujan,
Mindoro Oriental. The armed men forcibly took away Ms. Marcellana and Mr.
Gumanoy. Four others were separated from the group, blindfolded and
dropped off in different places in Mindoro Oriental.

       The following day, April 22, 2003, the lifeless bodies of Ms. Eden
Marcellana and Mr. Eddie Gumanoy were found in a roadside ditch in Brgy.
Alcadesma, Bansud, Mindoro Oriental. They were both brutally tortured
before being killed. MSgt. Donald Caigas, intelligence officer of the 204th
IBPA and military asset Aniano “Silver” Flores as well as elements of the 204th
IBPA under the command of then Col. Jovito Palparan, Jr. are believed to be
behind the killings and other human rights violations committed upon this
group. Elements of the 204th IBPA, together with military assets who were
former rebels, are also believed to be behind these killings.

       Threats, Harassment and Intimidation, Coercion, Divestment of
Property – The other members of the 11-person fact-finding team that went
with Ms. Eden Marcellana and Mr. Eddie Gumanoy to Gloria, Mindoro Oriental
experienced threats and harassments while they were under the control of the
armed men who commandeered the van they were riding. The soldiers and
armed men took their cell phones and wallets and threatened to kill them if
they continue with their work.

   The summary execution of Bishop Alberto B. Ramento

        In the early morning of October 3, 2006, Bishop Alberto B. Ramento of
Iglesia Filipina Independiente or IFI (Philippine Independent Church), widely
known as the “bishop of the poor peasants and workers”, was brutally
stabbed to death in his room at the San Sebastian Church in Tarlac City.

        Simply because his cellular phone and bishop’s ring were missing and
presumed stolen, the Philippine National Police was quick to dismiss the case
as a simple case of robbery with homicide. But the family of the bishop and
the church to which he belonged are not convinced about the investigation
conducted by the police for the following reasons: The crime scene
investigation by the police was perfunctorily done and completed in only about
two hours, after which the crime scene was not cordoned off to preserve the
evidence. Apparently, no fingerprint was lifted from the crime scene; the
Indictment                                                                         24

police report never came up with a fingerprint finding. Except for the sworn
statement of the church caretaker, Archimedes Ferrer, there was no interview
of any family member, church member or other people close to Bishop

        The family of Bishop Ramento and his church strongly believe that the
investigation conducted by the police is a cover-up and a sham. They are
certain the killing was politically motivated. They cite the numerous death
threats received by the bishop which he had communicated to them. They
believe he was murdered because of his political activities and affiliations as a
human rights advocate, especially his staunch and active support for the
striking workers of Hacienda Luisita and his open condemnation of the human
rights violations committed by state forces not only in Central Luzon but
throughout the country.

       A man of peace, Bishop Ramento formed and headed the IFI’s
“Peacemakers”, was Co-Chair of the Philippine Peace Center and a Convenor
of Pilgrims for Peace, a multi-sectoral network supporting the peace
negotiations between the Government of the Republic of the Philippines
(GRP) and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) and
advocating a just and lasting peace based on justice, freedom and
democracy. In 1998, the NDFP nominated him as an Independent Observer in
the Joint Monitoring Committee of the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect
for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL).

        Bishop Ramento was likewise often in the frontlines of protests and
rallies denouncing the ills of Philippine society and demanding the ouster of
President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo.

       The killing of Alice Omengan-Claver & frustrated killing of Dr.
       Constancio “Chandu” Claver

       Dr. Constancio “Chandu” Claver, a practicing physician, is the
Chairperson of Bayan Muna-Kalinga and Vice-Chairperson of Cordillera
Peoples Alliance-Kalinga. He is also the Chairman of the Board of the
Philippine National Red Cross in Kalinga and a member of the Kalinga
Medical Society. He served as the Executive Director of the Community
Health Education Center in Kalinga Apayao. On the other hand, Alice was an
active member of the Cordillera Peoples Alliance during her college years in
Manila. Upon returning to Tabuk, she had been very generous in providing
support to people’s organization including the Cordillera Peoples Alliance in

       Sometime on 31 July 2006 at around 6:45 in the morning, Alice
Omengan-Claver and Dr. Constancio “Chandu” Claver were aboard a Black
Pajero Van when they were ambushed by unidentified gunmen-wearing black
bonnet and sweatshirt. The assailants were on board a White and Black
Delica Van with plate number BFC-372 and TNB-901, respectively. They were
Indictment                                                                         25

supposed to drop their daughter, Cassandra, to school at Saint Tom’s College
in Barangay Bulanao, Tabuk, Kalinga when the incident happened.

       Dr. Chandu Claver was seriously wounded while Alice Claver
sustained multiple gunshot wounds. They were brought to the Kalinga
Provincial Hospital where Alice expired six hours later while undergoing
surgery. Their daughter, Cassandra (7 years old), escaped the attack
physically unharmed but severely traumatized psychologically.

       Task Force Bulanao was created to investigate the incident. The
members of the Task Force showed Dr. Claver a cartographic sketch of a
man who was seen by the witnesses as one of the gunmen who fired at their
vehicle on July 31, 2006. Dr. Claver affirmed that the cartographic sketch
matched the features of the man he saw briefly standing at the left side of his
vehicle before he was fired at by the other man in a black ski mask and black
sweat shirt.

       The killings of Agnes Abelon and Amante Abelon, Jr. and the
       frustrated summary execution of Amante Abelon, Sr.

        Amante Abelon, Sr. and his wife are active members of Kilusang
Magbubukid ng Pilipinas (KMP or Farmers’ Movement in the Philippines) and
the progressive party-list organization Anakpawis (Toiling Masses) in
Zambales, an area within the jurisdiction of the 7th Infantry Division of the
Philippine Army under the command of General Jovito Palparan.

       Amante Abelon, Sr. is likewise an incumbent councilor of Barangay
San Rafael, San Marcelino, Zambales. He is also the Vice Chairperson of
Alyansa ng mga Magbubukid sa Gitnang Luzon-Zambales Chapter (AMGL or
Alliance of Central Luzon Farmers) a chapter organization of KMP. He
likewise served as Municipal Chairperson of Anakpawis in San Marcelino,

         On March 20, 2006, at around 11 a.m., while he, his wife Agnes, and
their five-year old son, Amante, Jr., were on board their motorcycle on their
way home from the Municipal Hall of Castillejos, Zambales, two (2) men on
board another motorcycle fired at them. Amante, Sr. was hit by three (3)
bullets on his left arm. The motorcycle the Abelons were riding skidded and
fell to the ground. Knowing that he was the target of the gunmen, his wife
prodded him to run. While running, he told his wife and child to do the same
as he believed the armed men were only after him as the gunmen continued
to fire at him. They stopped shooting only when they reached a crowded

        Amante, Sr. suffered nine (9) gunshots wounds in different parts of his
body. He was able to call for help and was brought to a hospital for treatment.
It was only after his one week confinement in the hospital when he learned
that his wife, Agnes and his son, Amante, Jr., were shot in the head by his
Indictment                                                                         26

       While Amante, Sr. was in the hospital, unidentified men were still
looking for him.

       Despite the fact that the incident happened on the highway and the
police responded immediately, they did not conduct an investigation, did not
even take photographs of the crime scene nor, at the very least, made a
sketch of the place of the incident and the relative position of the victims, all of
which are standard operating procedure in crime investigation.

       To date, the perpetrators remained unidentified. However, Abelon
believes that his frustrated summary execution and the killings of his wife and
child were the handiwork of the intelligence forces of the Philippine Army and
the same were politically motivated as they were active members of KMP and

       The killing of Diosdado Fortuna

       Diosdado Fortuna or “Ka Fort” as he was fondly called by his
colleagues was the president of the Union of Filipino Employees, the
recognized bargaining union of the employees in Nestlé Philippines. He led
the workers’ strike starting January 14, 2002 after the management refused to
comply with the 1991 Supreme Court ruling on the inclusion of the workers’
retirement benefits in their collective bargaining agreement.

        Fortuna was also the chairperson of PAMANTIK-KMU, the regional
formation of trade unions based in Southern Tagalog; and the chairperson of
Anakpawis Party-list in the same region.

        On 22 September 2005, Diosdado Fortuna was shot twice in the back
by two unidentified armed men in the subdivision near Sagara Factory in
Barangay Paciano, Calamba City. The bullets went through his chest fatally
injuring his heart, liver and spleen, and causing his instant death.

        Prior to his death, he reported that he had constantly been under
surveillance from the time the union went on strike. He had several
encounters with the police on different occasions.

      Sometime on April 2002, Fortuna, together with other sectoral leaders,
was invited by the then General Cesar Sarino at Camp Vicente Lim to
supposedly discuss the problems in the picket line. During the meeting,
however, they were told that 95 unions under the banner of Kilusang Mayo
Uno (KMU or May First Movement) were suspected fronts of the CPP-NPA
and were all under surveillance.

      On 12 October 2003, Jose Betito, another labor organizer in the region
was abducted in front of the PAMANTIK office. The abductors mistook him
for Fortuna. According to him, he heard one of the abductors tell his
companion that Betito was not the one they were looking for. Betito was
Indictment                                                                         27

illegally detained for more than 24 hours during which time he was shown
surveillance videos and photos of Ka Fort. There was even a video and photo
of Ka Fort with X marks, he said.

        Disodado Fortuna was the second Nestlé Union president killed during
the workers’ strike. His predecessor, Meliton Roxas, was killed in front of the
picket line in 1989.

        Although Ka Fort’s case has been reported to Calamba-PNP and Task
Force FORTUNA was created to investigate the case, to date the
investigation has not progressed.


       The case of Rogelio & Gabriel Calubad

       On 17 June 2006, at about 7:00 a.m., Rogelio Calubad, 53 years old,
and his son, Gabriel, 29 years old, left their house in Barangay Apad-Lutao,
Calauag, Quezon for Barangay Bangkuruhan of the same town, to fence off a
parcel of land recently purchased by Rogelio’s sister. They left on a
motorcycle driven by Gabriel.

       About twenty (20) meters from their destination, Rogelio and Gabriel‘s
vehicle was suddenly overtaken by a dark blue van bearing no license plate
and a motorcycle, causing Rogelio and Gabriel to fall off their motorcycle.
Immediately, several armed men alighted from the van and forced Rogelio
and Gabriel to lie face down on the ground. They handcuffed and jostled
Rogelio into the van, while they forcibly took Gabriel onto their motorcycle.
After snatching Rogelio and Gabriel, the convoy sped away and abandoned
the motorcycle belonging to Rogelio and Gabriel.

       Worried about her husband and son’s failure to return home that day,
Rogelio’s wife, Elizabeth, searched for them in vain the following day in
Barangay Bangkuruhan.

       Having been told by a villager in Barangay Bangkuruhan who
witnessed the abduction, Elizabeth, accompanied by the chairpersons of
barangays Bangkuruhan, Apad-Lutao and Madlandungan, next went to the
Calauag Police Station to report the incident. There, Elizabeth was informed
that the victims’ motorcycle had been earlier turned over to the station by a
barangay peace officer. Elizabeth also learned from police investigator
Nestor Afuen that the police already knew about the incident as early as 10:00
a.m. of 17 June 2006.

       Having obtained no information from the police about the whereabouts
of her husband and son, Elizabeth, together with the three barangay
chairpersons, proceeded to the 76th Infantry Battalion stationed at Brgy.
Biñas. The commanding officer, a certain Ben Tibano, denied having custody
Indictment                                                                         28

of Rogelio and Gabriel. Elizabeth and her group also searched for the victims
at the headquarters of 417th Provincial Police Mobile Group at Camp Villarasa
in Brgy. Sta. Maria, but the public information desk officer there denied having
custody of the missing Calubads.

        Prior to the abduction of Rogelio and Gabriel Calubad, on 10 August
2005, Rogelio’s brother, Cesar Calubad, was unlawfully arrested without a
warrant by the Police Mobile Group of Camarines Sur. Cesar had later
confided to Elizabeth that he was subjected to a tactical interrogation in which
he was asked mainly about the personal circumstances and whereabouts of
his brother, Rogelio. Cesar’s captors tortured him in an attempt to force him
to turn in his brother.

       Elizabeth also recalls that on September 2005, an alleged
representative of the Department of Local and Interior Government conducted
a purported census on Elizabeth’s house and underhandedly asked personal
information about Rogelio Calubad.

        Elizabeth strongly suspects that the military belonging to the 2nd
Infantry Division of the Philippine Army based in Camp Nakar, Barangay
Gulang-gulang, Lucena City, Quezon, by order and at the behest of SOLCOM
Chief Lt. Gen. Alexander Yano, ISAFP Chief Commodore Leonardo Calderon,
Jr. and AFP Chief of Staff Gen. Hermogenes Esperon, Jr., and their agents
were behind the abduction of her husband and son, especially because
Rogelio Calubad is a consultant to the NDFP Negotiating Panel. As such,
Rogelio is a duly accredited and protected person under the Joint Agreement
on Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG) between the Government of the
Republic of the Philippines (GRP) and the NDFP, and enjoys immunity from
surveillance, harassment, arrest and detention by the GRP’s securiy forces.
Moreover, he and his son had not committed any offense for which they may
be arrested or deprived of their liberty without any formal charge or judicial

        On 3 August 2006, Elizabeth, representing her missing husband and
son, filed before the Philippine Supreme Court a petition for habeas corpus.
The Supreme Court remanded the case to the Regional Trial Court of Lucena
City where the respondent military unit operates. For fear of her life and that
of her family, Elizabeth had asked the court to send the case back to the
Supreme Court but the same was denied. On motion for reconsideration,
however, the Supreme Court granted the transfer of the case to the Regional
Trial Court of Manila. To this day, the case has not been resolved and
Rogelio and Gabriel remain missing.

       The case of Patricio Abalos

       In the evening of March 28, 2005, Patricio Abalos, 67 years old, the
provincial chairman of the farmers’ cooperative in Brgy. Guindapunan,
Catbalogan, Samar, was at home with his family and other relatives. They
were watching television when suddenly Patricio’s daughter, Cristina, noticed
Indictment                                                                         29

a Toyota Revo van parking in front of their house and saw some men around
the vehicle. She told her father about it. When he went out to check, the car
was gone.

        When the van came back, four (4) armed military elements belonging
to the 8th Infantry Division under Maj. Gen. Jovito Palparan forcibly took
Patricio Abalos at gunpoint. Thereupon the van sped away. A motorcycle
bearing no car plate like the van was on tail.

       In the evening of the same day, Patricio’s family reported to the police
the fact of the abduction.

        The next day, Cristina and her mother searched for Patricio at Camp
Lucban in Maulong, Catbalogan where the 8th Infantry Division of the
Philippine Army is based. But they were denied entry into the camp. They
then tried to seek the help of the Public Attorneys’ Office. But said office,
explaining that it was also being harassed, turned them down. Not giving up,
on March 30, 2005, they went back to the military camp, but once again they
were shooed away.

        On March 31, 2005, six soldiers barged into and searched Patricio’s
house against the will of the members of the family and without a search
warrant. The group was headed by one who introduced himself as Lt. Wilbert
Basquiñas who arrogantly admitted having custody of Patricio. He told
Patricio’s family that he and his men were looking for a gun allegedly kept in
Patricio’s wooden trunk. Cristina and her family pleaded with the soldiers. Lt.
Basquiñas ignored them and proceeded to ransack the house, threatening
and aiming his pistol at the family while brandishing his fan knife.

        While the soldiers could not find any gun, they still took with them
Patricio’s trunk which contained his IDs, wallet and medicines. They also
threatened to take Patricio’s wife should she not surrender the gun they were
insisting was inside the trunk. Cristina’s family later reported the incident to
the police. But the latter refused to help them, saying they would not want to
antagonize the military.

       On April 2, 2005, Cristina went back to the police station and reiterated
the fact that her father remains missing.

        On April 7, 2005, Cristina and her mother went to seek the help of
Congressman Figueroa. They chanced upon Gen. Palparan at the
congressman’s house.      Cristina noticed that the general’s vehicle parked
outside the house was the same vehicle used by the military in the abduction
of her father.

        Cristina and her mother confronted Gen. Palparan. But Gen. Palparan
ridiculed Patricio and itried to bully the family into admitting that Patricio was
an NPA. Palparan threatened the family, saying: “I hope that when your
father and I talk again, he won’t be as hard headed as he is. I’m bad when I
get angry and I’m getting angry now.”
Indictment                                                                         30

       Cristina asked Palparan why her father was being illegally detained
and why they were not allowed to visit him. At this, Palparan replied that he
had given the go-signal to visit Patricio. Cristina and her mother also insisted
for the release of Patricio, but Palparan rejected it, saying Patricio was old

      After Palparan left, Cong. Figueroa told Cristina and her mother that
Palparan had admitted Patricio was in the military’s custody.

         Cristina filed a petition for habeas corpus against the military unit
illegally detaining Patricio before the Court of Appeals in Cebu City. However,
the court dismissed the petition on the ground that there was no sufficient
proof of detention. The order of dismissal of the petition was issued despite
the fact that Cristina and other witnesses were presented to prove that armed
military elements belonging to the 8th Infantry Division and upon the order of
Gen. Jovito Palparan forcibly abducted Patricio Abalos from his house on
March 28, 2005.

       Cristina has also filed cases of arbitrary detention, robbery, violation of
domicile, among others, against then Brig. Gen. Palparan and Lt. Basquiñas.
But the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor in Samar absolved Palparan from
the charges.

       The case of Sherlyn T. Cadapan and Karen E. Empeño

       Sherlyn T. Cadapan (“Sherlyn”) and Karen E. Empeno (“Karen”) are
both students from the University of the Philippines who were doing research
in Barangay San Miguel, Hagonoy, Bulacan when they were abducted.

       On 26 June 2006, at around 2:00 a.m., Sherlyn and Karen who were
then staying in the house of one Raquel Halili at Barangay San Miguel,
Hagonoy, Bulacan, were forcibly taken with their hands tied by elements of
the Philippine Army based in the Headquarters of the 56th Infantry Batallion,
Iba, Hagonoy, Bulacan, under the command of Maj. Gen. Romeo Tolentino,
Brig. Gen. Jovito Palparan and Col. Rogelio Boac.

       The soldiers also took Manuel Merino, a farmer who was then staying
in the adjacent house (owned by William Ramos) and who went out to help
the two UP students. Manuel Merino was also tied down, brutalized and

        William Ramos and his son, Wilfredo Ramos, saw the victims being led
to a private stainless jeep with plate number RTF 597. Father and son were
made to lie face down with their hands tied. The stainless jeep fled towards
Iba, Hagonoy, Bulacan.

      When this abduction incident came out in the news, the human rights
group KARAPATAN-Bulacan Chapter immediately launched a quick response
Indictment                                                                         31

team composed of Alyansa ng Mamamayan para sa Pantaong Karapatan or
ALMMA (Citizen’s Alliance for Human Rights) members and volunteer staff of
Barangay Human Rights Action Center headed by Mildred Benitez.

       The group went to the 56th Infantry Battalion Headquarters and there
they saw the stainless jeep with plate number RTF 597. The military camp
which used to be open for visitors was closed and they were not allowed
inside. Mildred, however, heard a barbecue stand vendor ask who they were
looking for. “Yung mga babae ba?” [“Are you looking for the women?”] he
asked, but when the reply was “yes,” the vendor did not say a word again.

       On 28 June 2006, at around 10:00 in the evening, Alberto Ramirez
was awakened by shouts from Manuel Merino, the same person who was
abducted earlier on together with Sherlyn and Karen. When Alberto looked
out he saw that Manuel had two male companions who immediately pointed
their guns at Alberto. The men forced Alberto out of his house. Outside, he
saw more armed men who were waiting for them in a vehicle with plate
number RTF 597. The incident was also witnessed by people in the
neighborhood who were all threatened by the armed men not to say a word
about what they saw.

        Alberto was brought to Brgy. San Miguel, Hagonoy, Bulacan and
thereafter in the military’s detachment at Brgy. Mercado located at the second
floor of the barangay hall. At the detachment, one of the men who took part in
the abduction introduced himself to Alberto as Arnel Enriquez. Arnel showed
Alberto two leaves of bond paper with names written thereon. Arnel asked
Alberto about those names. Arnel also mentioned the names Sherlyn
Cadapan who according to him is also known as “Ka Tanya” and “Ka Lisa”
and Karen Empeno as “Ka Sierra.”

        Alberto was asked by Arnel to cooperate with them and to help them
identify or point to the persons whose names were listed in the bond papers
or suffer the consequences. He was allowed to leave but was warned to
report back to the detachment at 2:00 p.m. the following day. But instead of
going back to the detachment, Alberto left the place and reported the matter
to the human rights group KARAPATAN.

       A Petition for Habeas Corpus was filed on behalf of Sherlyn Cadapan,
Karen Empeño and Manuel Merino. A writ of habeas corpus was issued
against Maj. Gen. Tolentino, Gen. Palparan, et. al. In their Return of the Writ,
they all denied having custody of the victims and even denied having
knowledge about their abduction. To date, the three are still missing.

       The case of Perseus Geagoni
Indictment                                                                         32

       Perseus Geagoni is an active organizer and the Education Officer of
the Negros Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW) in Bacolod City, a duly-
registered organization of sugar plantation workers.

      Perseus Geagoni was on his way home on a borrowed red-black KMX
Kawasaki sports motorcycle with motor plate “for registration” from the office
of Negros Federation of Sugar Workers (NFSW) in Bacolod City in the
evening of 05 December 2005 when he was abducted by unidentified men.

       A witness named Thadea B. Vivero said that about 6:30 P.M. of 05
December 2005, she saw a red and black colored Kawasaki sports
motorcycle overtaking the jeep she was riding. Ahead of it were a Honda
motorcycle and a gray, tinted Tamaraw FX van swerving and deliberately
blocking the Kawasaki sports motorcycle.

       According to Perseus’ wife, Nieva, sometime on the third week of
December 2005, a soldier confirmed that a group of thirty (30) operatives led
by 1st Lt. Clarence Garrido of the 11th Infantry Battalion and under the
supervision of the Visayas Military Intelligence Command under the command
of Major Ariel Quiachon of the Philippine Army were responsible for the
abduction of Perseus Geagoni.

        Prior to the incident, Geagoni had reported several instances of being
tailed. One particular incident was in November 2005 when he was chased by
a motorcycle-riding man in Garita, Brgy. Zone 14-A, Talisay City. He avoided
the man by speeding up towards Colegio de San Agustin, Bacolod. Also, on
several occasions, two unidentified men had asked for his whereabouts.

      The fact of his abduction has been reported to the police. The victim
remains missing.


       The cases of Oscar Leuterio, Bernabe Mendiola, Virgilio Calila
       and Teresa Calilap

        On April 17, 2006, at around 10:35 in the morning, while Bernabe
Mendiola was handing out the salaries of the workers in Iron Ore Mining,
around 30 military elements in plainclothes, together with civilian guides Bitoy,
Alladin and Alvin Pastrana, indiscriminately fired upon the workers’ site. At
that time, there were more or less 60 workers in the work site. The assailants
were armed with high caliber rifles such as M203, M16 and M14, and their
faces covered. The civilian guides who were bare-faced were also armed
with high caliber rifles.

       The armed military men went to the workers’ huts located in the mining
site. The workers were bodily searched and their personal belongings such
as cellular phones, money and other personal items were forcibly taken from
Indictment                                                                         33

them. More or less 30 cellular phones and cash amounting to about
P200,000 were taken from the workers.

       The workers were all ordered to lie face down on the ground in front of
the hut located at the center of the site and under the scorching heat of the
sun from 10:35 am to 5:00 pm. Oscar Leuterio, Bernabe Mendiola, and the
couple Virgilio and Teresa Calilap were separated from the rest of the
workers. Their hands were tied and they were kicked, trampled and hit by
M16 and M14 rifle-butts in different parts of their bodies. While being beaten,
they were forced to tell the armed men the names and whereabouts of the
members of the NPA.

        At around 5:00 pm, the four victims were ordered to stand up and were
blindfolded. Their abductors took them to the woods about 200 meters away
from the center of Brgy. Camaching on board a truck owned by Iron Ore
Mining. At the woods, the four workers were subjected to further beatings.
They were again interrogated on the whereabouts of the NPA.

       At around 10:00 pm, they were brought to Camp Tecson in San
Miguel, Bulacan. Oscar Leuterio said he saw where they were taken to
because his blindfold got loose and he saw the words Camp Tecson on the
arch they passed through. They were taken to a small hut in the rear part of
the camp. They were deprived of food, and they were subjected to more
beatings. A certain Boy Muslim in yellow T-shirt and denim pants and who
was drunk was carrying out the torture.

       Boy Muslim pounded on Oscar Leuterio’s head with a 2x3 piece of
wood that produced a big gash on the left side of his head. The same piece
of wood was also used to pound his fingers and toes causing them to burst
open. The wood was also used to clobber his legs and knees. When Boy
Muslim once again struck his head with the piece of wood, Oscar lost
consciousness. The other three victims suffered the same fate as Oscar’s.
The latter related that before he lost consciousness, he witnessed the
beatings suffered by his other companions since they were all placed inside
the same hut.

        When Oscar regained consciousness, he saw his companions and an
investigator who did not identify himself. The investigator told him that they
were thankful that he regained consciousness because they all thought he
was already dead. The investigator tried to mollify him by saying that Boy
Muslim is really evil when drunk and he was only doing his job.

        In the morning of April 18, 2006, Oscar was taken out of the hut and
was brought to a table beside it for questioning. The investigator asked him
the names of the members of the NPA and where they were hiding. Oscar
told him that as far as he knew, the NPA usually inhabit the forest and set up
their camps where there are sources of water. The questioning lasted for half
an hour, after which, he was brought back inside the hut and the rest of the
victims were also taken out for questioning. They were given lunch and were
Indictment                                                                         34

given first aid treatment. They applied betadine on Oscar’s head wounds and
he was also given antibiotic and pain reliever.

        Oscar related that because they were blindfolded and their hands were
tied, a boy who introduced himself as Noli fed him during lunch. Noli was an
altar boy of Fr. Viola, a Roman Catholic priest from their hometown and the
son of Oscar’s friend Lito. Noli was arrested because his brother is suspected
to be an NPA member and the whole family allegedly supports the NPA.

       They were made to take a rest after lunch and at about 8:00 in the
evening they were taken on board a van; Oscar assumed this because they
entered it through a sliding door on its side. He also sensed that other than
the four of them, there were military men on board the van.

        The travel lasted for about three hours. They were brought to a house
in the middle of the woods, which they later found out to be inside Fort
Magsaysay in Laur, Nueva Ecija. They figured this out when they heard male
voices talking about their plan to go to a wet market in Cabanatuan. This was
later confirmed when they heard aircraft landing and taking off in a nearby
airstrip. Fort Magsaysay is the closest military installation with an airstrip.

         They were taken into a house with four adjoining cells. Each cell
measured about 6x3x5 feet. It had concrete walls and floor and metal grills
topped with galvanized iron roofing. It also had a toilet made of hollow blocks
at its other end.

      Oscar was placed in the cell closest to the door, to his right was placed
the Calilap couple, next to their cell was Bernabe Mendola’s and the last cell
was occupied by the brothers Raymond and Reynan of Bohol na Mangga,
San Miguel, Bulacan. Until now Bernabe Mendiola remains missing.

        The following day, they were untied and their blindfolds taken off.
They were given respite and time for the wounds to heal. On the seventh day
of their incarceration, the beatings resumed. They were whipped with a water
hose in different parts of their bodies while being questioned on where they
hid the guns and the names of those in possession of guns. The whipping
lasted for about 5 minutes.

       They were blindfolded every time they were taken out of their cells for
questioning but their blindfolds were removed once they were inside. Since
Oscar’s cell was beside the door, he could see the people outside through the
space in the door when it was not properly closed.

       The guards told them that “lolo’s replacement will take them home”.
Oscar found out that it was a certain Gomez who accompanied them. Oscar
and Manuel together with another one abducted and finally released from
Peñaranda and six more soldiers rode in a Pajero. Oscar was made to get off
in San Ildefonso, Bulacan and was told to hire a tricycle to go home. It took
him two weeks to find a cellular phone to contact his son to pick him up.
Indictment                                                                         35

       The illegal arrest, arbitrary detention and torture
       of the “Tagaytay Five”

       Now collectively known as Tagaytay Five, Riel R. Custodio of
Batangas City; Michael M. Masayes of Tagaytay City; Axel Alejandro A.
Pinpin of Indang, Cavite; Aristedes Q. Sarmiento of Calamba City and Enrico
Y. Ybanez of Tagaytay City are peasant leaders, organizers and advocates
associated with Katipunan ng mga Magsasaka ng Kabite (KAMAGSASAKA-
KA) a provincial peasant organization of the KMP.

        At around 6:30 sundown of April 28, 2006, while traveling along Ligaya
Drive, Sangay, Tagaytay City, the members of Tagaytay Five were forcibly
and illegally abducted by an estimated 30 to 40 heavily armed elements of the
Philippine National Police and the AFP-Philippine Navy Intelligence and
Security Force (NISF). Their abductors wore various uniforms and plain
clothes, all bearing no name plates, and carrying no warrants of arrest or
search warrants.

        For three (3) agonizing days, which seemed eternity for them and their
relatives, they were kept blindfolded and hog-tied, involuntarily interrogated
without the aid of counsel, physically harmed and repeatedly threatened with
electrocution and summary execution. They were held incommunicado in
various military and police camps and safe houses and deliberately hidden
from their relatives. They were divested of all valuables, personal belongings,
and organizational properties. The unmistakable marks of torture are now
borne by at least two (2) of them. Sarmiento’s 2nd degree burn wound on his
right leg remains unhealed three (3) months after their abduction.

         Unable to get even a shred of evidence, the above-mentioned PNP
unit planted belatedly evidence on the Tagaytay Five and declared in a press
conference presided over by the then Chief of the PNP, Director General
Arturo Lomibao in Camp Crame, Quezon City on May 1, 2006 that they
belonged to a group of NPA sent to destabilize the Arroyo government during
the Labor Day celebration. Brute force and psychological torture were
inflicted to force the Tagaytay Five to admit membership in the NPA. They
however failed to break the spirit of Tagaytay Five, who steadfastly denied the

       A case of rebellion was filed against the Tagaytay Five before the
Regional Trial Court of Tagaytay City. On the other hand, despite complaints
and evidence of torture found on the Tagaytay Five, the arresting officers
were not even investigated by the PNP and the Navy.

       The illegal arrest, arbitrary detention and torture
       of the “Lopez Six”
Indictment                                                                         36

        Fernando Torres, Nonilon Parro, Herbert Imperial and minors
Jefferson Paraiso, Kennedy Abilio, and Joey Imperial collectively known as
the “Lopez Six” are farmers from Lopez, Quezon.

        On June 7, 2006, an encounter between the NPA and elements of the
Philippine Army occurred in Sitio Amogis, Barangay Pisipis, Lopez, Quezon,
where an army soldier was killed and another wounded.

        On that day, minors Jefferson Paraiso, Kennedy Abilio and Joey
Imperial together with Herbert Imperial were gathering copra, (dried coconuts
for milling) when they heard the gunfire from a nearby area. Since it was
dangerous for them to continue with their work, they stopped and went to their
uncle, Fernando Torres. They decided to resume working when the gunfire
stopped. Along the way, however, they met the elements of Philippine Army
who immediately took them into custody and brought them to the scene of the
encounter. They were hogtied and subjected to bodily harm by the military.
Thereafter, they were brought to Barangay Villa Espina where a truckload of
soldiers were waiting.

        They were brought blindfolded to a military camp in Barangay
Banabain, Lopez, Quezon. A case of rebellion was filed against them by the
military. They were, however, not members of the NPA as claimed by the
military. While in military custody, they were subjected to physical and
psychological torture to force them to admit to their alleged membership in the

       The illegal arrest, arbitrary detention and torture of Angie Ipong

        On 8 March 2005 at about 2:00 in the afternoon, Angie Ipong was
forcibly abducted without a warrant of arrest by armed men wearing bonnets
who introduced themselves as members of the Philippine National Police-
Criminal Investigation and Detection Group (PNP-CIDG) at the Anastacia
Mission Village in Barangay Lumbayao, Aloran, Misamis Occidental where
she was supposed to have a consultation meeting with peace advocates
regarding CARHRIHL. With only sleeping garments on, she was dragged into
a silver white van and blindfolded despite her pleas.

        Ipong was held incommunicado until 11 March 2005 inside a bunker at
the 1st Infantry (Tabak) Division Camp of the Philippine Army in Pulacan,
Labangan, Zamboanga del Sur. She was photographed against her will. As a
sign of protest, Ipong went on a hunger strike.

        On 12 March 2005, she was brought to the AFP-Southern Command
Headquarters in Zamboanga City where she was interrogated under duress,
tortured and sexually molested. There her abductors tied her hands to her
back, punched her at the sides and hit her head. They blindfolded her every
time she was interrogated. They undressed and subjected her to acts of
lasciviousness. They fondled and made her breasts and other private parts
Indictment                                                                         37

the object of fun. Ipong was placed in a room with the air-conditioning unit
intentionally switched on full blast. It was under this condition that Ipong was
forced to admit though untrue that she was a top ranking official of the CPP-

        After the forced “admission,” Ipong was spared from further torture.
Although obtained through force and under duress, this was made the basis
for the rebellion and triple murder cases filed by the Judge Advocate General
Office of the Armed Forces against her before the Regional Trial Court of
Dipolog City.

      On 14 March 2005, Gen. Braganza of the Southern Command
presented her to the media allegedly as a captured NPA leader. At that time,
she was so sick, nauseated and pained that her abductors had to wheel her

      On 18 March 2005, she was brought to the Molave Municipal Hall then
to Ramon Magsaysay Prison.

       The following day, or on 19 March 2005, Ipong was taken to Pagadian
City Jail where she is currently illegally detained. It was only on this day that
she started to eat porridge and root crops.

        From the time Ipong was abducted until 20 March 2005, her family,
friends and legal counsel had searched for her in different military camps,
including the 1st Infantry Tabak Division in Pulacan, Labangan, Zamboanga
del Sur. But the military denied having arrested Ipong or having her in their

       It was not until 21 March 2005 that Ipong was allowed to be visited by
her lawyer, Atty. Andres Nacilla, and by KARAPATAN.

Attacks on church people

        Church people have also been the targets of attacks either by troops in
uniform, military agents or their death squads. To date, 23 church workers,
10 of whom were pastors and priests have become victims of extrajudicial

       Rev. Jeremias Tinambacan was a resident pastor of the United
Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) in Calaran, Calamba, Misamis
Occidental. He was an active member of the Kapatirang Simbahan para sa
Bayan (KASIMBAYAN), the Promotion of Church People’s Response-
Western Mindanao and the Gloria Step-Down Movement (GSM)-Misamis
Occidental. He was also the Provincial Chairperson of Bayan Muna –
Misamis Occidental chapter, and the Center for Relief and Development
(CENRED), and the executive Director of the Mission for Indigenous and Self
Reliance People’s Assistance Incorporated (MISPA, Inc.)
Indictment                                                                         38

       On May 9, 2006, at around 5:30 p.m., Rev. Jemias and his wife Rev.
Marilou Tinambacan were on their way to visit some relatives in Oroquieta
City, Misamis Occidental on board their Besta van. When they reached
Barangay Mabod in Oroquieta City, four armed men on board two DT
Yamaha-Type motorcycles suddenly appeared on their side and began
shooting at them.

       Upon seeing that they were being shot at, Rev. Marilou immediately
hid beneath the dashboard. Rev. Jemias lost control of the car after being hit
and crushed onto a gemelina tree. The suspects continued firing at the
vehicle. Rev. Marilou saw one of the suspects, Mamy Guimlan, who is a
known military intelligence agent, who cried out “Buhi pa ang bay!” (The
woman is still alive!) But he failed to see her because she was able to hide.

       Rev. Jemias was hit thrice in the head, while Rev. Marilou sustained a
wound on her head that was narrowly missed by a bullet and some bruises on
her shoulder as a result of the car crash.

        The victims were immediately rushed to the Misamis Occidental
Provincial Hospital in Oroqiueta City, but Rev. Jemias was declared dead on
arrival. Rev. Marilou was treated for her wounds.

        Rev. Edison Lapuz was the Chairperson of Katungod-Karapatan in
Eastern Visayas, founding member of PCPR, convenor of Justice for Atty.
Dacut Alliance, conference minister of North Eastern Leyte Conference
(NELCON)-UCCP and coordinator of Eastern Visayas, Visayas jurisdiction,
UCCP. He was also the BAYAN MUNA coordinator for Leyte and Samar. On
March 12, 2005, around 6:30 p.m. Rev. Lapuz was shot by two unidentified
assassins aboard a motorcycle, hitting him on the left temple and stomach.
He died on the spot. His companion, Alfredo Malinao, a peasant leader and
barangay captain was also wounded on the chest, near his heart. The killing
took place in San Isidro, Leyte. Sometime in May 2005, military men went
four (4) times to the house of Rev. Lapuz’ father. They asked him about the
whereabouts of his son. The military men also asked for a copy of the latest
picture of Rev. Lapuz. One of the military men was identified as a certain Lt.
Mangohon. On May 13, 2005, Lt. Mangohon, along with four military men
visited the wake of Rev. Lapuz, a few hours after he was gunned down.

        Rev. Father William Tadena was assigned to the parish of the Iglesia
Filipina Independiente (IFI) in La Paz, Tarlac and had served well his
parishioners. He was appointed as the Chairman of the Human Rights and
Social Concerns Committee of the Diocese of Tarlac. He was a member of
the local chapter of the local chapter of the Promotion of Church People’s
Response (PCPR) and Alliance for the Advancement of Human Rights
(KARAPATAN). He was a genuine advocate for the legitimate rights of the
workers and a supporter of the struggle of the Hacienda Luisita workers.

       On March 13, 2005, at about 7:00 a.m., Fr. Tadena celebrated Mass at
the mission chapel of the Iglesia Filipina Independiente, Barangay Guevarra,
La Paz Tarlac. After the mass, around 8:00 in the morning, he proceeded to
Indictment                                                                         39

the La Paz town proper for the next mass, together with his sacristan Charlie
Gabriel, parish secretary Miss Ervina Domingo and his guitarist Carlos
Barsolazo on board his owner type jeep. As they drove along the provincial
highway towards La Paz they slowed down in front of the Guevarra
Elementary School (approximately 50 meters away from IFI chapel) because
of a hump on the road. An unidentified person at the waiting shed called his
name saying “father”, at the same time waving for him to stop. He was joined
by another unidentified person. Both were wearing helmets. As the two
persons approached the jeep, Father Tadena sensed some danger and told
Ervina Domingo who was sitting at the front seat “Ambush na ito.” (This is an
ambush!) At that moment, the two men immediately shot Father Tadena
three times as well as Carlos and Charlie who were sitting at the back seat.
One of the perpetrators positioned himself beside the jeep and parried Ervina
while firing two more shots hitting Father Tadena on his nape and head.

         Thereafter, the perpetrators hurriedly boarded their motorcycle and
drove towards the town of Victoria, Tarlac. Several IFI parishioners rushed to
the scene of the incident and after seeing Father Tadena and his companions
seriously wounded helped them and rushed them to the La Paz Medical
Center for first aid. Then they were brought to the Central Luzon Doctors’
Hospital in Tarlac City. Medical attention was given but to no avail. Father
Tadena died of the gunshots wounds. Church guitarist Carlos Barsolazo was
in critical condition after he underwent surgical operations. Charlie Gabriel
sustained two gunshot wounds in the legs and was pronounced out of danger.
Ervina Domingo sustained bruises on her wrist and leg, suffered extreme
anxiety and was in a state of shock.

Attacks on journalists/media people

        Since President Macapagal-Arroyo assumed the presidency in 2001 to
date, there have been 48 work-related killing of journalists. Remarkably 12 of
them were killed in 2006. Other journalists face threats and harassments in
an attempt of those in power to silence them.

       Spouses George and Maricel Vigo, both journalists in Kidapawan
City, were on their way home on a motorcycle in the afternoon of June 19,
2006 after a visit to and meeting with Fr. Peter Geremia, an Italian-American
missionary who has worked in Mindanao since 1977, when they were shot to
death by a gunman on a motorcycle with companions.

        At the time he was killed, George Vigo, 33, was a correspondent at the
Union of Catholic Asian News (UCAN)-Philippines. Maricel, on the other
hand, was a program host at the church-run dxND radio station in Kidapawan,
North Cotabato. Both were peace advocates and wrote about the church and
communities’ peace initiatives in their region and conducted campus
journalism training in Kidapawan City where they shared the idea of public
and peace journalism.
Indictment                                                                         40

       George regularly wrote about the rights of the ‘Lumads’ (or the
‘indigenous peoples’) particularly against the intrusion of banana plantations
around Mt. Apo which is considered sacred by the Lumads.

       After their murder, the police pointed to a certain Dionisio Madanggit,
allegedly an NPA hitman, as the perpetrator; but the NPA strongly denied the
police theory. The following day, the police summoned Maricel’s mother to
the police station and asked her to sign some documents. She was told that
the papers were meant to establish that she was Maricel’s mother and that
George was her son-in-law. Alave, who has failing vision, said she signed the
documents even though she could not read what was written on them.

        It was only later when her son, Gregorio, discovered that the
documents his mother had signed included a paragraph that identified the
killer as a certain Dionisio Madanguit. Mrs. Alave said she retracted the
statement because she never knew that man.

       Marlene Garcia-Esperat, was a chemist who became an anti-
corruption activist and columnist for the Midland review, a community paper in
Central Mindanao.

       She was gunned down on March 24, 2005, at her home in Tacurong
City while taking supper as her daughter and two sons watched in horror.

       Before her death, she filed two dozens graft and corruption cases and
other complaints of irregularities against local and national officials before the
Ombudsman and other quasi-judicial bodies.

       These cases include the P423 million fertilizer scam involving former
Department of Agriculture undersecretary Jocelyn “Joc-Joc” Bolante, former
national Food Authority Administrator now Department of Agriculture
Secretary Arthur Yap, and many other key DA officials.

        She was also instrumental in furnishing vital information on the P728
million fertilizer fund scam, which led the Senate to cite Bolante in contempt
and order his arrest.

       On 6 October 2006, the Cebu City Regional Trial Court convicted
Gerry Cabagay, Randy Grecia and Estanislao Bismanos on charges of
murder. However, the murder charges against the alleged masterminds,
Department of Agriculture Region XII Finance Officer Osmeña Montañer and
accountant Estrella Sabay were dismissed. Suspect-turned-state witness ex-
seargeant Rowie Barua, the self-confessed henchmen who hired Cabagay,
Grecia and Bismanos to kill Esperat was acquitted for lack of evidence.

        Last year, multiple libel cases were filed by First Gentleman Miguel
Arroyo against 43 reporters, columnists, editors, publishers and subscription
manager of different publications. There was even an attempt by the police to
arrest and detain one of these journalists charged with libel during a press
briefing right at Malacanang palace where the presidential family resides and
Indictment                                                                         41

the President holds office.     The First Gentleman has also filed libel suits
against the Tulfo brothers.

Attacks on lawyers

       The country is not only a dangerous place for journalists and activists
but for members of the legal profession as well. In 2006 alone, a total of
seven lawyers have been killed while nine lawyers, one judge and one law
student were killed in 2005. Most of those killed were human rights lawyers
and were killed by reason of the exercise of the profession or advocacy. Also
reported were a number of cases of threats and harassments against lawyers
involved in land and labor disputes and human rights cases.

         Juvy Magsino, 34 years old, a woman human rights lawyer and the
Vice Mayor of Naujan, Mindoro Oriental at the time of her death. She was
also the Chairperson of Mindoro for Justice and Peace and a candidate Mayor
for the 2004 elections. Ms. Leima Fortu, 27 years old, was a teacher and
Acting Sec. Gen. of Mindoro Oriental. On the night of February 13, 2004,
Atty. Magsino and Ms. Fortu were on board a Toyota Revo on their way home
to Naujan coming from Calapan City. At around 11 pm, as they were leaving
their friend’s house, a man fired at them. As they sped off, two men on a
motorcycle chased them and repeatedly fired shots at them. Later, their
lifeless bodies were found inside Atty. Magsino’s Toyota Revo that was
ditched in a rice field at Bgy. Amuguis, Naujan, Mindoro Oriental. Elements of
the military were responsible for this crime. The shooting happened only 500
meters from the 204th Brigade Headquarters.

        Felidito Dacut, 51 years old, married, was the Regional Coordinator
and Legal Counsel of BAYAN MUNA Partylist in Eastern Visayas. He was
also a member of the Board of Directors of the Integrated Bar of the
Philippines (IBP). On March 14, 2005 at around 6:45 p.m., Atty. Dacut was
shot at his back by two unidentified men aboard a TMX single motorcycle at
Real St., Tacloban City while he was on board a multi-cab vehicle on his way
home from a meeting. The assailants used a short pistol with ‘silencer’
wearing white round T-shirts and maong pants. Atty. Dacut was among those
who initiated a ‘solidarity mission’ to investigate human rights violations in
Catarman, Northern Samar; He was handling human rights and labor cases.

        Gil Gojol was a human rights and labor lawyer since the 1990s. He
was lawyer to farmers in Bicol and those political persecuted and charged by
the military with acts of rebellion. On December 12, 2006, Atty. Gohol was
killed with his driver Danilo France in Gubat, Sorsogon about 200 meters from
a detachment of the 22nd Infantry Battalion of the Philippine Army. Gohol had
just come from a court hearing and was on his way to Sorsogon City when
four motocrcycle-riding men shot at his van. France was the first to be hit
causing the vehicle to stop. Gohol tried to flee from his assailants but bullets
hit him at the back and his buttocks, causing him to fall on his face. The
assailants then went near him and shot him in the head causing his instant
Indictment                                                                         42

        Charles Juloya is a human rights lawyer who serves as the Legal
Adviser of the Ilocos Human Rights Alliance, an organization of human rights
advocates affiliated with human rights group KARAPATAN. On March 22,
2005, Atty. Juloya parked his car across the road to his law office in La Union,
Philippines. As he was about to cross the road on his way to the wake of
another victim of human rights violation, an unidentified male fired at him with
a caliber .45 pistol. The assailant fired eight consecutive shots, hitting Atty.
Juloya twice. One bullet fractured his left foot while another went through his
stomach. Fortunately, he survived the attack.

Attacks on Party List Organizations

       Bayan Muna is a national political party duly accredited by the
Philippine Commission on Elections to participate in the Party List elections.
Composed mainly of workers, farmers, professionals and other progressive
sectors, Bayan Muna champions the cause of “New Politics, the “politics of
change” in the Philippines. Campaigning for social reforms and firmly
opposing foreign domination, feudal bondage and bureucratic corruption,
Bayan Muna won three seats in the House of Representatives in the 2001
elections, under the party list system.

        The party list system is a mechanism designed to allow the
“marginalized sectors” representation in Congress. A Party List organization
can win seats in the House of Representatives if it garners at least 2.5 percent
of all votes cast for the Party List.

       Bayan Muna was joined in 2004 by Anakpawis, a Partylist party
representing the interests of the toiling masses; Gabriela Women’s Party List
party, representing the interests of the women sector; Suara Party
representing the interests of the Bangsa Moro; Migrante Party List party,
representing the migrant workers; and Anakbayan, representing the interests
of the youth. In the 2004 elections, Bayan Muna won three seats, Anakpawis
two seats, and Gabriela Women’s Party List party, one seat in the House of

       Together, they became known for championing the rights and welfare
of the marginalized sectors of the country, i.e., workers, peasants, women,
youth, fisherfolk, indigenous peoples, urban poor and other down-trodden by
actively pushing urgent people’s concerns in the halls of the Philippine
Congress. They also participate in the parliament of the streets, directly
engaging in and supporting mass protest actions on a variety of issues.

        Since Bayan Muna emerged victorious in the 2001 elections, its
leaders and members have been the target of brazen attacks by government
officials, notably by National Security Adviser Norberto Gonzales. Anakpawis,
Gabriela WPL, and Suara have similarly been targets of killings, harassments
and other human rights violations since 2004. The Arroyo regime has
repeatedly branded these party list parties as “front” organizations of the
Indictment                                                                         43

Communist Party of the Philippines and as target for “neutralization” (in
military parlance, physical elimination of the subjects).

       Since 2001, one hundred and twenty-eight (128) members and leaders
of Bayan Muna have been summarily killed. Since 2004, thirty-two (32)
Anakpawis, two (2) Suara, and one (1) Gabriela party list members and
leaders were killed. A still undetermined but considerable number have
survived assassination attempts, while fourteen (14) party list members and
leaders have forcibly disappeared.

       On March 9, 2005 at around 4:30 p.m., Romy Sanchez, the Ilocos
Regional Coordinator of Bayan Muna was in Baguio City with his companions
to buy 2nd hand clothing materials. They were along Kayang (?) Street of the
said city when Sanchez was shot by unidentified men. His companions saw
him already lying on the pavement with blood oozing from his wound.
Sanchez died on the spot. Before his killing, he had been receiving death
threats and was being implicated by the military in the murder of Fr. Conrado

       Florante Collantes was the Secretary General of Bayan Muna in
Tarlac City. He was also a labor organizer at the Bataan Export Processing
Zone. On October 15, 2005 at around 11 am, unidentified men shot him in
front of his home in Barangay Tuec, Camiling, Tarlac. According to
witnesses, Collantes was attending to household chores when motorcycle
riding men stopped in front of their house. Thinking that the men would buy
cigarettes from their store, Collantes attended to them. But suddenly, one of
the two men got off the motorcycle and shot Collantes killing him instantly.
The victim’s wife later described the assassin as a burly man wearing dark
jacket. According to her, three days before the incident, same man on board
his motorcycle had stopped by the store and bought cigarettes. Prior to the
incident, Colantes had been subjected to surveillance.

      Ricardo Uy, a 57 year old businessman was the Chairperson of Bayan
Muna in Sorsogon City Chapter. He was also a member of Sorsogon
Independent Media Reporters Incorporated (SIMRI).

       On November 18, 2005, while he was alone inside his rice mill, a tall
man with long hair wearing sunglasses and a hat went inside and shot him at
his back. According to Uy’s helper, he heard five gunshots. He immediately
rushed to the rice mill; inside the mill, he saw the assassin who leveled his
gun at him and shot him but the gun had no bullet anymore. The man
casually walked and went back to his motorcycle parked near the rice mill.

       Uy was an active human rights worker and had been a constant
subject of verbal attacks by the military in their radio programs for being
allegedly a supporter of a communist legal front organization.
Indictment                                                                         44

        Alden Boy Ambida is the regional coordinator of Bayan Muna-Eastern
Samar and Vice-president of the Borongan Trycicle Drivers and Operators
(BTDOA). On April 9, 2005, at around 11 a.m., Ambida was driving his
tricycle with passengers when he noticed two men with XLR motorcycle
following him.

        When his passengers were getting off the tricycle, he again noticed
from his motorcycle’s mirror the two men approaching him. He then positioned
his tricycle towards the direction of the approaching motorcycle; he saw the
man on the motorcycle draw his gun with a silencer, aimed the gun at him and
fired shots at him. He managed to jump out of the driver’s seat. He sustained
one gunshot wound on the chest and another on his side. Fortunately he
survived the attack. Prior to the incident, Ambida was warned by a family
friend to be careful because military elements are after him.

         In most military operations in both urban and rural areas, Bayan Muna
has been subjected to vilification campaign. Residents of the community
identified as supporters of Bayan Muna have been harassed and forcibly
asked by elements of the military to ‘clear’ their names or ‘surrender’.

      Bayan Muna regional offices have been raided, fired at or burned
down. In Eastern Visayas, Bayan Muna office in the province of Northern
Samar was lobbed with homemade Molotov using military newsletter as wick.
In Eastern Samar, the provincial office was burned down. In Central Luzon,
the provincial office of Tarlac was also burned down. These incidents
happened in 2005.

Attacks on Civil Liberties

        Since the 2004 elections, valid issues on Mrs. Arroyo’s legitimacy as
the duly elected President have been raised by a broad spectrum of political
forces in Philippine society.        These political forces include various
multisectoral and sectoral organizations, the progressive party-list
organizations and their representatives, opposition parties and leaders,
churches and religious leaders, students, professionals, academicians and
artists, business groups and retired military officers.

        Furthermore, the Macapagal-Arroyo administration has continued to
face serious threats of mutiny from restive military and police officers and men
questioning the involvement of some of their seniors in election fraud in 2004
and rampant corruption in the military-police establishment.                Most
significantly, President Macapagal-Arroyo’s tenuous leadership is being
challenged by the 85 million Filipino people themselves, majority of whom
according to poll surveys, want her to resign while a substantial number want
her ousted from office.

Facing the prospect of a mounting call for here ouster after her hasty and
dubious proclamation as President-elect, Macapagal-Arroyo clamped down
Indictment                                                                         45

on legitimate protest actions that threatened to snowball and reinvigorate the
movement calling for her to step down from office.            She launched a
desperate political offensive through a series of repressive measures aimed at
stifling dissent, suppressing all forms of legitimate protest activities and
curtailing basic freedoms of speech and assembly.

       President Macapagal-Arroyo resorted to repressive measures such as
violent dispersal of protest rallies, the “calibrated pre-emptive response,” “no
permit, no rally policy,” Executive Order 464, Presidential Proclamation 1017
and General Order No. 5, and a massive crackdown on her critics and political
opponents, including media, the political opposition, civil society groups and
particularly the progressive party list members of the House of
Representatives and other progressive personalities.

Violent dispersal of peaceful assemblies and mass protest actions

       On 13 July 2004, members of Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (BAYAN
or New Patriotic Alliance) and Migrante International, an organization of
overseas Filipino workers, held a rally at Plaza Miranda, Manila to demand
the withdrawal of Filipino troops in Iraq to ensure the release of Mr. Angelo de
la Cruz, a Filipino worker held captive by an Iraqi resistance group.

       While the program was ongoing, the police used force to prevent a
jeepney carrying demonstrators and a powerful sound system from entering
the plaza. In the process, the police elbowed BAYAN staffer Alberto Villamor
in the face, hit him with a truncheon, handcuffed and hauled him off to the
Western Police District substation near Plaza Miranda.

        Shortly after, the police commanding officer P/Supt. Sapitula arbitrarily
revoked the agreement between the police and the demonstrators that the
rally could proceed until 7 pm, and ordered the protesters to disperse in fifteen
minutes. The protesters promptly moved out of Plaza Miranda and regrouped
on Quezon Avenue so that they could march to Liwasang Bonifacio. The
police blocked them and, with absolutely no provocation, trained their
powerful water hoses at the rallyists and charged at them, wildly swinging
their truncheons and using their shields to shove the rallyists back.

       Carol Araullo, Chairperson of BAYAN suffered a two-inch wound on the
head and was bloodied when she was treacherously struck from behind by
one SPO1 Levy Cardiño with his truncheon. Other policemen, many of them
in plainclothes, conducted arrests with excessive force. They seized Renato
Reyes, General Secretary of BAYAN; Glyziel Gotiangco, General Secretary
of the National Union of the Students in the Philippines; and Edgar Faldas.
Faldas, was whacked and bashed with truncheons, punched and slapped by
the police while he was being dragged the police car.

      Gotianco and Villamor were brought to Police Station 3 in Sta. Cruz,
Manila where they were joined by Reyes and Faldas. They were all taken to
the Jose Medical Reyes but the diagnoses did not reflect their injuries. At no
Indictment                                                                         46

time during their arrest and detention were they ever informed of their rights
under custodial investigation.

        P/Supt. Sapitula ordered the filing of charges of Direct Assault,
Violation of BP 880, Violation of Section 1119 of the Revised Ordinance (RO)
of the City of Manila and Resisting Arrest against Araullo, Faldas, Reyes,
Villamor and Gotianco. In a Resolution dated 18 August 2004, the Assistant
City Prosecutor for Manila, Ms. Lolita Rodas, dismissed the cases filed
against them on the ground that the allegations of the police constitute no
probable cause.     .

       Calibrated Pre-emptive Response

        On September 21, 2005, in the wake of the defeat of impeachment
moves and a looming upsurge of mass demonstrations calling for Mrs.
Arroyo’s resignation or removal from office, the Arroyo administration through
Executive Secretary Eduardo Ermita declared the enforcement of the
“calibrated preemptive response” rule in lieu of maximum tolerance. The
Philippine National Police (PNP) was then also instructed to strictly implement
the “no permit, no rally” policy provided for by Batas Pambansa Blg. 880.
Following this declaration, violent dispersals of even the most benign protest
actions became the order of the day. The vicinity around the presidential
palace was declared a “no rally zone” to include historic Mendiola Bridge, the
traditional venue for airing grievances against the government.

        The calibrated pre-emptive response rule was immediately challenged
and defied by various groups. A series of rallies starting on the first week of
October 2005 were designed to reach Mendiola. On October 4, 2005, the
“Walk for Democracy” in defense of civil liberties and in defiance of the CPR
was held under the auspices of the Movement of Concerned Citizens for Civil
Liberties (MCCCL). The police violently dispersed the peaceful assembly and
arrested and charged some of the participants.

        On October 6, 2005, the multisectoral alliance BAYAN and the Gloria
Step Down Movement, an informal alliance of different organizations calling
for the resignation of President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo led a protest rally in
the City of Manila to denounce the rising number of extrajudicial killings and to
reiterate their demand for Mrs. Arroyo to step down following the electoral
fraud scandal and other corruption cases.

        More or less one hundred elements of Western Police District (WPD) -
Philippine National Police in full battle gear led by C/Supt. Pedro Bulaong
arrived. Majority of the policemen were not wearing nameplates. As the group
started to line up for the march, the leaders presented the Endorsement from
the office of the Mayor to the ground commander Supt. Bernard Diaz.

       Without any warning, one WPD official commanded his men to
disperse the protest action. The demonstrators were then violently pushed
back with the use of metal shields and were thus forcibly dispersed. Several
Indictment                                                                         47

protesters were hurt and illegally arrested. Criminal charges were filed
against the policemen with the Office of the Ombudsman but the office is yet
to act on their complaint.

      On October 14, 2005, a religious procession led by three Catholic
bishops and former Vice-President Teofisto Guingona, Jr. was dispersed
using water cannons as they approached Mendiola.

      Even the freedom of belief and religion was trampled upon when the
Presidential Security Guard (PSG) refused entry to four priests and a handful
of church-goers attending a “Mass for the Victims of Hacienda Luisita
Massacre and Political Killings” at the San Miguel Church near Malacanang
Palace on November 15, 2005.

       In a decision promulgated on April 25, 2006, the Supreme Court
declared as unconstitutional the calibrated preemptive response (CPR) policy
of the Arroyo Administration.

       Executive Order 464

        In order to prevent the Senate and the House of Representatives from
unearthing the truth about anomalous government contracts, the fertilizer fund
scam, the Hello Garci tapes (a tape of a tapped conversation evidently
between Macapagal-Arroyo and a member of the Commission on Elections,
where the former sought and got assurance from the latter that she can be
made to appear the winner in Mindanao by a million votes) , electoral fraud
and other scandals involving the presidency, Mrs Arroyo issued Executive
Order 464 on September 26, 2005, requiring all heads of departments of the
executive branch, all senior officials of the executive departments, all
generals, flag officers and “such other officers in the judgment of the Chief of
Staff” of the Armed Forces of the Philippines, officers of the Philippine
National Police with the rank of chief superintendent or higher and “such other
officers in the judgment of the Chief of the PNP,” senior national security
officials “in the judgment of the National Security Adviser,” and “such other
officers as may be determined by the President” to secure the President’s
prior consent before appearing before the Senate or the House of

      The Executive Order is practically a gag order on government
employees or officials and a violation of the people’s right to information. It
renders inutile the oversight functions of Congress and destroys the system of
checks and balances between the legislative and executive branches of

       Proclamation No. 1017

       On February 24, 2006, Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo declared a state of
national emergency pursuant to Proclamation No. 1017. She cited a “tactical
alliance” and “concerted and systematic conspiracy” between elements in the
Indictment                                                                         48

political opposition, “authoritarians of the extreme left, represented by the
NDF-CPP-NPA, and the extreme right, represented by military adventurists.”
After making the finding of the alleged conspiracy and the additional finding
that their “consequences, ramifications and collateral effects constitute a clear
and present danger to the safety and integrity of the Philippine State and of
the Filipino people”, Mrs. Arroyo as President and Commander-in-Chief of the
Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) ordered the AFP “to maintain law and
order throughout the Philippines, prevent or suppress all forms of lawless
violence as well as any act of insurrection or rebellion and to enforce
obedience to all the laws and to all decrees, orders and regulations
promulgated by me personally or upon my direction…”

        On the same date, Mrs. Arroyo also issued General Order No. 5
reiterating the provisions of Proclamation No. 1017 but adding the phrase
“terrorism” and directing the Philippine National Police, in addition to the AFP,
“to immediately carry out the necessary and appropriate actions to suppress
and prevent acts of terrorism and lawless violence.”

        On February 25, 2006, Anakpawis Representative Crispin Beltran was
arrested in Del Monte City, Bulacan by an armed team of PNP-Criminal and
Investigation Group (CIDG) operatives led by a certain Police Chief Inspector
Rino Corpuz. The arrest was made without a warrant of arrest in violation of
his constitutional rights, and while the Congress was in regular session in
contravention of his parliamentary immunity. He was later charged with
inciting to sedition and rebellion. Up to the present, he remains in the custody
of the PNP.

        Similarly, Bayan Muna Party-List Representative Joel Virador was
illegally arrested while at the PAL Ticketing Office along Roxas St. in Davao
City on February 27, 2006. Aware that they would be subjected to a similar
illegal arrest and arbitrary detention as their colleague Crispin Beltran, Bayan
Muna Party-list Representatives Saturnino Ocampo and Teodoro Casiño,
Gabriela Party-list Representative Liza Maza and Anakpawis Representative
Rafael Mariano sought the protective custody of the House of
Representatives in the evening of February 27, 2006. They were later joined
by Rep. Joel Virador, who was allowed to leave police custody to join his
colleagues.      Such protective custody was granted by the House of
Representatives. They remained in the custody of the House until they were
able to leave the Batasan Complex on May 8, 2006 without being arrested.
Rebellion charges were filed against the progressive party-list
representatives, which are still pending before the courts.

Attacks on Communities

       As an integral and major component of its “counter-insurgency”,
“counter-secessionist”, and now “counterterrorist” strategy, the AFP and PNP
have invariably conducted massive military operations in the countryside, in
Indictment                                                                         49

“critical areas” identified as “rebel-infested or influenced”, or areas controlled
by the NPA, Bangsa Moro (MILF and MNLF), and the Abu Sayyaf Group.

        Based on vintage-Vietnam US military doctrine, these counter-guerrilla
strategies hew to the basic Clear-Hold-Consolidate-Develop formula, all of
which consider and treat the majority of the civilian population as suspected
sympathizers, if not actual members of the armed guerrilla groups. In other
words, the people are the enemy. Thus, AFP and police counterguerrilla
doctrine include such “food and population control” measures as census-
taking, curfew, rationing, hamletting, “no-man’s-land” zones, etc.; as well as
civil-military operations such as holding mass meetings, forming “volunteer
civilian organizations”, and forcible recruitment into the civilian paramilitary

       Not explicitly stated in the field manuals but clearly understood and
widely practiced by the military is the “psychological warfare” component
aimed at “winning the hearts and minds” of the people. The military mindset
and practice has always been to strike terror in the minds and fear in the
hearts of the people. As a US general infamously declared during the
Vietnam war, “grab them by the balls and their hearts and minds will follow”.
Thus, during the dark martial law years when the military reigned supreme
over civilian authority, and even after, state forces have been wont to resort
to all sorts of coercive measures and human rights violations, including
assassination of mass leaders, abduction, torture and massacres in order to
intimidate and control the civilan population. The selective assassinations are
also aimed at “dismantling the rebel political infrastructure”.

        The big difference now is that under the current “internal security
operations” plan codenamed “Oplan Bantay Laya” these military operations
have deliberately and consciously been brought out from the remote and
interior barrios (villages) to the town centers and even the metropolis. The
targets are no longer limited to the underground guerrilla organizations and
their rural mass base but to the legal and open democratic organizations
alleged to be ”front organizations”. While the known leaders and members of
progressive organizations tagged as “front organizations” are marked for
“neutralization”, entire communities much closer now to the town centers than
before are subjected to counterguerrilla military operations. Despite the
absence of any formal martial rule declaration, the civilian authority in these
areas is intimidated and supplanted by the military. The rule of law breaks
down entirely. The military commits grave human rights violations with

       Recently, the AFP has moved into communities in Metropolitan Manila
where the progressive movement apparently has a considerable electoral and
mass base and began to undertake these coercive and repressive population
control operations.

       The case of Barangay Conversion, Pantabangan, Nueva Ecija
Indictment                                                                         50

        Around midnight of October 8, 2006, about 50 soldiers from the 48th
Infantry battalion of the Philippine Army (PA), led by Lt. Noel Roysal and a
certain Lt. Garcia, arrived in Barangay Conversion, Pantabangan, Nueva
Ecija. Upon arrival, they immediately occupied the barangay hall and
converted it into a military detachment.

        The following day, the soldiers ordered at gunpoint some residents to
come with them to the barangay hall for questioning. Among those who were
forcibly brought to the barangay hall were spouses Librado and Martina
Gallardo, Macera “Neneng” Villajuan, Arthuro Tarlino, Boy Pascua, Delfin and
Victor Castañeda, Dante Castro and Boy Ramos.

       Siblings Librado Gallardo and Macera “Neneng” Villajuan were
fetched by soldiers from their respective houses for questioning at the
barangay hall.

        Librado and Neneng were brought to two separate rooms at the
second floor of the barangay hall. Neneng was blindfolded while being
interrogated. She was asked if she was a supporter of the New People’s
Army (NPA) and if she was giving food to the NPA. She denied being a
supporter of the NPA. The soldiers then threatened to harm her family if she
refused to admit giving support to the NPA.

        On the other hand, Librado was beaten and hit with a rifle butt by the
soldiers when he denied being a member and supporter of the NPA. He was
being forced to surrender an M-16 rifle he allegedly owned. When he denied
having any gun or rifle, he was again beaten while his face was covered with
a plastic bag.

         The interrogation and beating stopped only when both Librado and
Neneng were instructed to attend a barangay meeting at around 2 pm. The
meeting was called by barangay captain Wilfredo Riparep upon the order of
the military. It was held at the plaza or public square of the barangay. In the
meeting, the military accused the residents of supporting the New People’s
Army (NPA) and Bayan Muna, which they charged was a “front organization”
of the NPA. The soldiers warned the residents to stop supporting the NPA.
They also presented a list of alleged or suspected NPA members or
supporters, and ordered those whose names were in the list to report to the
barangay hall, clear their names and surrender their firearms.

       Pastor Eduardo Navalta Jr. of the Methodist church in the area was
one of those tagged by the military as an NPA supporter. The meeting was
finished around 6-7 pm but Librado was instructed to stay behind. He was
allowed to go home only at around 8pm.

       The next day, October 10, Librado was again forcibly taken from his
house by soldiers together with his wife, Martina and sister Neneng Villajuan.
The interrogation continued, forcing them to admit that they were giving
support to the NPA. During the interrogation, Librado was again beaten up by
the soldiers. He was allowed to go home before lunch but was again fetched
Indictment                                                                         51

in the afternoon and subjected to further beatings and interrogation which
lasted until 9 pm. Before leaving, the military threatened to kill him and his
family the next day if he would not surrender the armalite rifle he was accused
of hiding, the amount of P 40,000 and some documents.

       For fear that their whole family would be killed and because they could
no longer bear the mental and physical torture being inflicted on them by the
soldiers from the 48th IB, Librado and Martina committed suicide on October
11, 2006. Their son Leo had been killed in 2001 by soldiers from the same
unit. They left nine children.

       The case of Basilan Province ( June – September 2001)

       On July 2001, following the failure of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines to solve the kidnapping incident in Lamitan Island by the Abu
Sayaff terrorist group on June 2001, the Arroyo government declared Basilan
in a state of lawlessness. Through a memorandum from the Department of
Justice, the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) was ordered to arrest even
without warrant all persons suspected of being Abu Sayyaf members and

       Following this declaration there was heavy military deployment of up to
11 battalions under the command of the 103rd Infantry Brigade. The AFP
formed Task Force Comet to pursue the Abu Sayaff. Task Force Comet
consisted of Task Group Thunder headed by Col. Hermogenes Esperon
based in Isabela, Task Group Lightning headed by Col. Pedro Ramboanga
based in Tipo-Tio; and Task Group Tornado headed by Marine Col. Renato
Miranda based in Maluso.

       On 12 July 2001, elements of the 103rd Army Brigade had already been
dispatched to different areas in Barangays Tabuk and Sunset, Isabela,
Basilan, Province. When night fell, the troops positioned themselves in the
pre-identified areas where suspected members and sympathizers of the ASG
dwell. They cordoned the houses where their targets can be found.

      Checkpoints peppered the one and only road that connects the six
towns and one city of the province. From Isabela City to Sumisip town, a few
kilometers apart, 16 checkpoints manned by military and paramilitary groups
were set up.

        By dawn of the following day i.e., 13 July 2001, while the local
residents of the villages were still asleep, soldiers wearing masks to conceal
their faces, conducted a saturation drive and barged into the houses of the
residents and forced them to come out so the military could conduct searches
on their houses. The males were herded in one place while informants with
their faces masked, pointed out alleged ASG members and sympathizers,
who were immediately arrested, hogtied and blindfolded, and their houses
subjected to intensive search. Despite demands by the residents for search
and arrest warrants, the soldiers did not show them any warrant.
Indictment                                                                         52

      Twenty-eight Isabela residents were arrested and brought to the 103rd
Brigade Headquarters in Barangay Tabiawan, which is about four (4)
kilometers away from Barangay Tabuk.

       Inside the military camp, those arrested were subjected to tactical
interrogation. Some were physically and mentally tortured to force them to
admit complicity with the Abu Sayaf Group. They were mauled, slapped and
beaten. Afterwards, they were made to sign a document saying that they were
treated well and were not harmed.

       Cases of kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention were filed against
the twenty-eight civilian residents.

        On 22 August 2001 AFP launched an operation where several villages
were bombarded in Sumisip town, causing the evacuation and displacement
of entire communities.

       By 23 September 2001, Philippine government’s Department of Social
Welfare and Development placed the number of Basilan residents affected by
the military operations to 78, 736 individuals or 13, 421 families.

       Brazen and extensive looting occurred in the abandoned houses of the
residents. The displacement and the destruction and looting of their houses
had caused the residents loss of their livelihood and untold suffering.

       Forced evacuations had also resulted in the disruption of classes
because schools were either occupied by the soldiers or used as evacuation
centers, or the school buildings had been damaged by mortar shelling or
aerial bombing during military operations. More or less 100 civilian residents
were also illegally arrested.

        Military operations had resulted also in extrajudicial killings. From June
to August 2001, ten victims of extrajudicial killings were documented; all
characterized by brutality as revealed by the perpetrators’ mutilation of the
remains, signs of heavy torture inflicted on the victims and arrogant and
blatant manner of killing. Victims were identified as: (1) Roque Hamajin, 17
years old ; (2) Jaang Pulaan, 50 years old; (3) Mr. Hamajin, husband of Jaang
Pulahan who all died on July 11, 2001 during the military operation conducted
by 32nd IBPA in Brgy. Pipil, Tipo-tipo, Basilan; (4) Ibno Mallaji, 27 years old
was abducted and burned to death on September 7, 2001 by elements of
Marines and CAFGU; (5) Banadin Ujajon, 45 years old; (6) Abdua Ujajon, 17
years old; and (7) Abubakar Ujajon 13 years old were found dead a month
after they were abducted by CAFGUs in their farm on July 24, 2001; (8)
Nuramum Asunum, 27 years old was arrested in a check point at Brgy.
Colonia, Lamitan and killed the day after; (9) Hadji Ahmad Asan was killed by
CAFGUS and found dead on August 27, 2001 buried under a pile of coconut
husks, his entire body was swollen from beating and his left foot was cut off;
(10) Jasan Linungan, 22 years old was shot to death by elements of the
military on June 10, 2001.
Indictment                                                                         53

      At present, the illegally arrested victims continue to be in detention,
they had been transferred to Camp Bagong Diwa in Bicutan, Taguig, Metro

        On March 14, 2005, around 7:30 a.m., about 10 prisoners planned a
jailbreak led by Alhamser Manatad Limbong, aka Commander Kosovo in
Camp Bagong Diwa. A team composed of Gov. Hussin, Cong. Hataman,
DILG Sec. Angelo Reyes and Gen. Avelino Razon was formed to negotiate
with the group of Commander Kosovo. The jailbreakers demanded from the
negotiators a guarantee that they be not harmed should they surrender, a
speedy trial of their cases, an investigation of the human rights violations
committed against them and full media coverage while surrendering to the
police. On March 15, 2005, at around 9:15 a.m., Sec. Reyes ordered the
PNP-SAF (Special Action Force) to assault the SICA (Special Intensive Care
Area) Building. The PNP-SAF indiscriminately fired at the SICA Building,
resulting in the death of 24 inmates, 11 of whom were included in the Free 73
Basilan, and injured many inmates.

       The forced evacuation of Marihatag, Caras-an and Lianga in
       Surigao Del Sur

       From April to May 2005, about 316 families with 2,241 individuals
evacuated from the towns of Marihatag, Caras-an, Lianga in Surigao Del Sur
province due to the military operations against MAPASU communities
(Malahutog Pakigbisog Alang sa Sumusunod or Preserving Struggle for the
Next Generation) - an organization of lumad communities in Lianga, San
Agustin, San Miguel and Marihatag, around the Andap Valley to protect the
mining operations in the area;

        The evacuation of families began in the morning of May 7, 2005 at the
height of military operations and massive bombings, purportedly against the
New People’s Army. Strangely, however, the operations mainly affected
civilians and there were no reports of NPA casualties.

       Farmers were physically assaulted, threatened and coerced into giving
unfounded information on the NPAs.         Elderly men and women were
photographed and misrepresented as armed rebels. Minors were forced to
serve as guides, accompanying soldiers in actual combat operations. Houses
were looted and burned. Civilians were tortured and abducted in full-view of
evacuees. After being shot and denied medical attention by soldiers, a farmer
died while evacuating with his family.

       Interestingly, the usual sites of military operations have been in coal-
rich Andap Valley, PICOP logging areas, Atlas gold mining areas, ARTIMCO
and SUDECOR logging concessions in Surigao del Sur. The AFP’s Special
Operations Teams have also been reportedly active in the gold-rich Jabonga
and Kitcharo municipalities of Agusan del Norte, Zapanta Valley of Surigao
del Norte, and logging concession areas in Agusan del Sur.
Indictment                                                                         54

        With the military operations occurring in areas located along Andap
valley, it is quite apparent that such atrocities were connected to mining and
logging interests. In the whole of CARAGA, a parallel has been established
between military deployment and the presence of logging and mining

       Strong local people’s organizations have consistently opposed the
entry of mining companies in the area as this has been a historical source of
dislocation of their communities.


                                   General and specific allegations
                                of gross and systematic violations
                            of economic, social and cultural rights

        The 1980 verdict of the Permanent People’s Tribunal on the Philippines
concluded that “Philippine society was semi-feudal and semi-colonial in
character whose economy was an adjunct of the United States (U.S.) and the
world capitalist system and bound by policies dictated by the U.S. and the
U.S.-controlled International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank (WB).”
The Tribunal recognized that this was the reason for the economy’s being
backward, agrarian and pre-industrial as well as its being mired in severe and
chronic crisis – which resulted in the deep, widespread and worsening poverty
of millions of Filipinos across the country. This was not a situation that the
Filipino people chose for themselves but, rather, was a condition forced on
them by U.S. imperialism in collaboration with domestic economic and political

        Today, nearly three decades later, the situation remains essentially
unchanged with neither real economic development nor improvements in the
lives and welfare of the people. The U.S. remains the dominant imperialist
power in the Philippines and in Southeast Asia, as it is in the rest of the world.
The Filipino people – the peasants, fisherfolk, workers, odd-jobbers, low-paid
professionals and other working classes – remain deprived of the fruits of their
labors by a distorted and deeply undemocratic economic system that is
structured for the profits of foreign and domestic elites. There are more poor
Filipinos today than at any time in the country’s history: some 65 million
Filipinos or 80 percent of the population struggle to survive on the equivalent
of US$2 or less each day (at current exchange rates). 1 Some 46 million
Filipinos do not meet the daily dietary requirement. 2 The incidence of poverty

1 IBON calculations on National Statistics Office (NSO) data. The government officially reports population poverty incidence of

30% by using an unrealistically low poverty line of just PhP33.72 (US$0.67 at current exchange rates). The official poverty
figure is also understated by excluding those without “official and permanent residence” – i.e. those living in squatter areas, in
the streets, ambulant rural poor, etc.
2 This estimate is from the United Nations Development Programme’s (UNDP) Second Philippine Progress Report on the

Millennium Development Goals. Using the official subsistence food threshold, the government reports 11 million Filipinos
Indictment                                                                         55

and hunger is worst in the areas of the Bangsa Moro people in Mindanao,
southern Philippines.

       All this prevails in the context of a backward, agricultural and pre-
industrial socioeconomic system. The Philippines is a fundamentally
agricultural nation. Yet feudal and semifeudal monopolies over the means of
agricultural production persist despite decades of government land and
agrarian reform programs none of which has genuinely distributed land on a
widespread scale or delivered the vital services to make this land productive.
The lack of true agrarian reform continues to deny the economy its base for
development. Severe exploitation by landlords, usurers, traders and
middlemen destroys peasant initiative and incentive thereby greatly
undermining productivity. The low agricultural output in turn means little
economic surplus for industrial investment. Widespread rural poverty
meanwhile hinders the development of a domestic market for local industrial
producers. The lost economic potentials and opportunities are considerable.

       The country’s semifeudal character most of all underpins the massive
lack of jobs and livelihoods in the country. This is aggravated by the virtual
absence of public social insurance or safety nets for millions of the country’s
poorest and most vulnerable. Most Filipino workers work in the informal or
underground economy or, if they are in formal sector, are hired as casual or
contractual labor. Hence they do not have access to social security and health
insurance that, in any case, even has very limited coverage. Barely half of the
employment is in wage and salary work with the rest being own-account or
unpaid family work. Unemployment benefits are unheard of.

       Indeed the situation today is in some key critical aspects even much
worse than in the 1980s. The last two and a half decades have seen a brutal
and intensifying imperialist economic offensive: the denationalization of the
economy through trade and investment liberalization, privatization of social
and public services, and deregulation of economic life. This neoliberal “free
market” offensive has adversely affected the lives and welfare of tens of
millions of Filipinos who suffer inadequate livelihood, food, shelter, health,
education and public services. But on top of that it has also destroyed
domestic productive capacity and further undermined the potential for future
economic development.

       Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo assumed the presidency on January 20,
2001 and has been the chief executive and head of state for six years now.
Since coming to power she has willfully and actively worked not only to
sustain this oppressive economic system but also to further surrender the
national economy to foreign plunder and exploitation. She has continued to
defend the policies of neoliberal “globalization” put in place by her
predecessors, has added to these anti-people policies even beyond the
nationalist bounds of the Philippine Constitution, and is even striving to
change the fundamental law of the land to be able to surrender wholesale the

unable to meet food subsistence requirements. However, as with the official poverty threshold, the subsistence food threshold
is extremely questionable for being set at an extremely low P22.33 (US$0.45) a day, or P7.44 (US$0.15) per meal.
Indictment                                                                         56

Filipino people and the national patrimony. The Arroyo regime has kept the
people miserable, aggravated their plight, and is working to add even more to
their misery.

        Imperialist “globalization” in the Philippines is implemented through
iniquitous treaties, agreements, laws, policies and programs pushed by
foreign monopoly capitalists and their domestic big business partners and that
serve their economic interests. These exploiters generate their massive profits
by forcibly stealing the labors of the Filipino working classes and from the
sheer plunder of the national patrimony. The Philippine labor force is
recognized and in demand worldwide for its skills, talent and perseverance;
the country is also considered one of the most biologically-rich and diverse in
the world with substantial agricultural, fishery, forestry, mineral, oil, gas and
geothermal potential. Yet the national economy has been and continues to be
designed for the aggrandizement of a few which leaves the majority of
Filipinos in a wretched and worsening state.

Overall economic policy framework

        The entire configuration of Philippine economic policy is designed to
benefit foreign monopoly capital and domestic big business elites at the
expense of the majority of the people. The situation is not only fundamentally
unchanged since the beginning of the Philippine neocolonial era, upon the
granting of nominal independence after the end of the Second World War, but
has been gravely worsening in the last nearly three decades of neoliberal
“globalization”. Landlord elites continue to dominate the vast rural economy
and peasants remain mired in unremitting semifeudal toil. At the same time,
greatly increased implementation of so-called “free market” economic policies
has dismantled vital economic protections, turned basic social services and
essential public utilities into luxury goods for a few, and made generating
profits for foreign monopoly capitalists as the central fact of modern economic

        The Philippines had a population of 87.0 million and gross domestic
product (GDP) of approximately P5.5 trillion (US$110 billion) in 2006. The
dismal socioeconomic situation of the majority of Filipinos today is a direct
result of the country’s long history of economic plunder made even worse by
the interlinked array of “free market” measures increasingly implemented
since the 1980s and, under President Arroyo, until today. The U.S.
government, IMF, WB, World Trade Organization (WTO), transnational
corporations (TNCs), transnational banks (TNBs), and their domestic partners
have been relentless in pushing policies that intensify the exploitation of the
Filipino people and the plunder of the Philippine economy. The U.S.
government has directly crafted domestic economic policy through the USAID
project Accelerating Growth Investment and Liberalization with Equity (AGILE)
with “satellite offices” in 11 key government and quasi-government agencies
Indictment                                                                         57

that have produced at least ten major economic laws. 3 “Free market” policies
are also persistently pushed by the U.S. through visits of high-ranking
economic officials, in U.S. embassy statements and country assessments,
and in statements of foreign chambers of commerce. The U.S. Trade
Representative maintains an annual list of what it deems as restrictive
Constitutional trade and investment barriers.

        The IMF’s regular country monitoring reports and their
“recommendations” remain influential and compliance has been compelled
not only through financial blackmail by commercial banks but also through
global capital markets. The WB also continues with its country strategies and
development policy loans, the most recent of which is a US$250 million loan
approved for disbursement in December 2006 after government
implementation of harsh fiscal measures including higher taxes and reduced
spending. All told there have so far been US$12.5 billion worth of loans and
US$88.8 million of grants in WB “development assistance” for 188 programs
and projects, and 24 IMF programs with attached loans worth US$3.0 billion
and SDR2.6 billion. Monopoly finance capital has since the 1990s also
increasingly used international bond markets and sovereign credit ratings as
leverage to compel both “free market” policies and tight fiscal and monetary
policies that had traditionally been the purview of the international financial
institutions (IFIs).

        Successive regimes since the 1980s have progressively taken away
policy instruments of state guidance and protection critical to domestic
development. Through their control of the presidency, Congress and the
judiciary, political elites have passed laws and implemented policies that
brazenly serve their own personal economic interests as well as of their fellow
elites and of foreign monopoly capital.

        Imports were liberalized through successive tariff reform programs
beginning as early as 1981 and spanning two decades. On the foreign
investment front, 100 percent foreign ownership has been allowed in all but a
few sectors since 1991; there is complete freedom to repatriate capital.
Foreign exchange controls were dropped in 1993. Water transport was
liberalized and deregulated in 1992 telecommunications in 1993, banking and
shipping in 1994, airlines in 1995, mining in 1995, oil in 1996 and 1998, and
retail trade in 2000. Some US$4.0 billion worth of government assets has
been privatized including oil firms, water utilities and power plants. Essential
road and power infrastructure has been turned over to the private sector
through build-operate-transfer (BOT) projects following deregulation in 1993.
Hospitals began the process of “corporatization” around 1999. The General

3AGILE held office in the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas, Department of Finance, Department of Budget and Management,
Department of Trade and Industry, Department of Agriculture, Department of Transportation and Communications, Bureau of
Customs, National Telecommunications Commission, National Economic Development Authority, Securities and Exchange
Commission, and the Philippine Stock Exchange. Among the programs and laws it drew up are on rice sector liberalization,
Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA, RA 9136), Plant Variety Protection Act (PVPA, RA 9168), Anti-Money Laundering
Act (AMLA, RA 9160), General Banking Act of 2000, Electronic Commerce Law, Countervailing Measures Act, Anti-Dumping
Act, Safeguard Measures Act and the Securities Regulation Code.
Indictment                                                                         58

Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) was ratified by the Senate in 1994
and the Philippines became a founding member of the WTO in 1995.

        Foreign monopoly capitalism’s opportunities for profit lie in there being
as few barriers, controls and regulations as possible to its productive,
extractive, commercial, usury and speculative operations. The neoliberal
policies of recent years are designed precisely to give big private profit-
seeking interests unparalleled latitude to dominate the economy and make
their profits at the expense of the majority. Yet these policies grossly violate
economic sovereignty because they deny Filipinos their economic and social
rights, and because they relinquish access and control over Philippine human
and natural resources. Moreover, surrendering the national patrimony to
foreign plunder gravely undermines the finite material basis for future
economic well-being and social progress.

        The cumulative macroeconomic effects of all this neoliberal
restructuring of the economy are severe. The average annual GDP per capita
growth rate of 0.6 percent in the “globalization” era 1981-2005 is barely one-
fourth of that in the previous period 1959-1980 (2.4 percent). It was also only
in this “globalization” period that the economy was hit by crisis so bad that it
actually shrank: in the years 1984-1985, 1991 and 1998. Recently, annual
real average family incomes even dropped by 10 percent since 2000 to just
P130,594 (US$2,612) in 2003; these are measured at current prices and, with
an average family size of six, correspond to P60 (US$1.20) per person per
day. 4

        However, not only has growth been slowing but the gains from these
meager growth rates have not even been going to the broad masses of the
Filipino people. Much of that growth is driven by increased foreign investment
in the domestic economy and the corresponding returns have accrued largely
to the foreign investors. Moreover, even for those returns going to Filipino
households, the gains have been grossly lopsided and already deep
inequality has become worse. Between 1985 and 2003 the poorest 60 percent
of the population have actually seen their share in national income becoming
even smaller – falling by 1.8 percentage points to just 25.8 percent of total
income – while the richest 20 percent were able to increase their share by
another 1.2 percentage points (i.e. to 53.4 percent of total income). 5 The
income of the richest 10 percent of households in the country is now 21 times
that of the poorest 10 percent of households.

       Hunger is widespread. The country’s nutritional status is in step with its
poverty: around 9.3 million households (56.9 percent of total households) with
46.3 million Filipinos do not even meet just the 100 percent dietary energy
requirement. 6 This is supported by a recent national survey with 67 percent of
households reporting difficulty in buying food. 7

4 National Statistics Office (NSO, 2005), 2003 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES)
5 National Statistics Office (NSO), Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) various years.
6 Food and Nutrition Research Institute (FNRI, 2005), 2005 Updating of the Nutritional Status of Children in the Philippines.
7 IBON Nationwide Opinion Survey, June 2006.
Indictment                                                                         59

        “Globalization” is also destroying the capacity of the economy to create
jobs and directly undermines the livelihoods of millions of Filipinos.
Joblessness and job scarcity have reached historic highs under the Arroyo
regime. In 2006 there were 11.6 million Filipinos unemployed (4.1 million) or
otherwise underemployed and still looking for more work (7.5 million) 8 – this is
the most number of Filipinos looking for work in the country’s history. The
average annual unemployment rate of 11.3 percent and underemployment
rate of 18.7 percent over 2001-2006 is also the worst six-year period of these
rates in the country’s history. The surging underemployment in particular
reflects how the jobs available are increasingly of low quality (i.e., non-wage
or -salaried work, part-time work, low-paying and insecure informal work,
etc.). The underemployment rate has severely deteriorated and increased by
some six percentage points in the last six years to a decade-high 23 percent.

        Deprived of their right to find decent productive work in their home
country, some 3,200 Filipinos are forced to leave the Philippines every day to
find work abroad. There are now over 9 million overseas Filipino workers
(OFWs) – equivalent to one-fourth of the country’s labor force – scattered in
192 countries worldwide. Their some US$13 billion in remittances yearly is
equivalent to around 15 percent of GDP which is a five-fold increase from
being equivalent to less than 3 percent of GDP in 1983. This makes the
Philippines the most overseas remittance-dependent economy of any
significant size in the world. The social costs are however severe:
domestically, families are split up; abroad, OFWs face discrimination, abuse
and violations of their rights to decent wages and working conditions.

        On the other hand, the last five years of the Arroyo regime have been
extremely profitable for the country’s 1,000 biggest corporations which have
seen their cumulative annual net income increase 325 percent from P117.0
billion (US$2.3 billion) in 2001 to P497.4 billion (US$10.0 billion) in 2005. 9

       President Arroyo, an economist, is unequivocally an advocate of
imperialist domination of Philippine social and economic life. As a senator in
the 1990s, she was the author and primary sponsor of the Senate ratification
of the GATT and Philippine accession to the WTO (Senate Resolution No. 97)
and of the laws on: comprehensive foreign investment liberalization (Republic
Act, or RA, 8179); allowing foreign investors to lease land up to 75 years (RA
7652); foreign investment in domestic mining (RA 7942), domestic banking
(RA 7721), public infrastructure projects (RA 7718) and special economic
zones (RA 7916); making export-orientation central to national economic
strategy (RA 7844); promoting high-value cash crops (RA 7900); the
expansion of regressive value-added taxes (RA 8241); and oil industry
deregulation (RA 8479). These are among the laws which have gone so far in
the neoliberal restructuring of the economy.

8 Income & Employment Statistics Division, Household Statistics Department, National Statistics Office (NSO).
9 Net income data in pesos from Business World Top 1000 Corporations in the Philippines, various years. These conversions
to US dollars use an exchange rate of P50:US$1.
Indictment                                                                         60

        As the current head of state President Arroyo vigorously defends
“globalization” policies, has implemented additional measures, and is taking
further ones that will consolidate and deepen foreign monopoly and domestic
elite control of the economy. She has also abetted and tolerated bureaucratic
bribery and corruption by foreign capital seeking profitable opportunities in the

        In her foreword to the Medium Term Philippine Development Plan
(MTPDP) 2004-2010, President Arroyo asserts: “[I have] involved myself
seriously in the formulation of the MTPDP particularly in the crafting of the
basic outline to ensure that the policy strategies and programs therein are
more focused.” Consequently, the central thrusts of the MTPDP are distinctly
neoliberal: “focused [foreign] investment promotion in priority markets”
especially in the U.S., Europe and Japan (MTPDP, p. 15) and continued
participation in and conclusion of free trade agreements (MTPDP, p.17).

       Most recently, in September 2006, the Arroyo regime signed an
onerous free trade agreement with Japan – the so-called Japan-Philippines
Economic Partnership Agreement (JPEPA) – which is the country’s first post-
colonial free trade pact. The deal is unequal in itself with backward agricultural
Philippines liberalizing its trade and investment regime even more than
advanced industrial Japan. But the inequity will be even worse in practice
where monopoly capitalist Japan is, by virtue of its economic strength, in a far
better position to take advantage of the drastic tariff cuts and removal of
controls on foreign investment. The JPEPA, moreover, even allows Japanese
businesses to dump their toxic wastes and other hazardous industrial
materials into the Philippines. In late 2006 the Arroyo regime also declared its
intent to enter into a similar free trade pact with the U.S. at the soonest
possible time.

       The regime is also pushing to open up the economy in the most far-
reaching way possible: by changing the Philippine Constitution itself and
removing its explicit economic sovereignty provisions. In her annual State of
the Nation Address in July 2005, President Arroyo called for “fundamental
change, [the] sooner the better, [through] charter change” and pitched for
“less government [that is] more conducive to free enterprise and economic
progress.” The Arroyo regime aims to remove all general and specific
provisions pertaining to how, “The State shall develop a self-reliant and
independent national economy effectively controlled by Filipinos” (Article II
Section 19). 10

10 These include the overall declarations of nationalist economic policy covering foreign economic relations and domestic policy
thrusts (Art. II. Declaration of Principles, Sec. 7, 17, 19, 21). There are also various specific provisions: restricting foreign
ownership, the degree of their involvement in decision-making and the grounds for expropriation (Art. XII, Sec. 1, 10, 11, 17,
18, 19; Art. XIV, Sec. 4; Gen. Provisions, Sec. 11); regulating the exploration, development and use of the national patrimony
and defining corresponding rights, privileges and concessions (Art. XII, Sec. 2; Art. XIII, Sec. 7, 8); giving preference to
Filipinos and stating the responsibility to protect, encourage and promote Filipino economic activity (Art. XII, Sec. 12, 14); and
giving the state various powers by which to assert national sovereignty, i.e. regulating trade, monopolies, and other economic
activity in the public interest and in favor of Filipinos (Art. XII, Sec. 1, 6, 12, 13, 19; Art. XIV, Sec. 12; General Provisions, Sec.
11), defining treaty-making powers (Art. VII, Sec. 21) and giving the Supreme Court the power to assert the constitution’s
nationalist provisions (Art. VIII, Sec. 4, 5).
Indictment                                                                         61

       Yet the dismal global experience with so-called “free market” and
“globalization” policies in recent decades is well-established with countries
across Asia, Africa, and Latin America seeing slowing growth, increasing
poverty, greater inequality and worsening performance in a wide range of
social indicators (e.g. infant, child and adult mortality, life expectancy,
education spending and enrollment). The historical and continuing experience
of the Philippines in the neoliberal “free market” era cannot but be miserable
and, given the elite-bias and subservience to imperialism of the current
regime, augurs the worst for the Filipino people in the years to come.

Trade and investment liberalization

       Philippine trade and investment liberalization policies are distinct but
they combine to comprehensively create the conditions for foreign monopoly
capitalist superprofits by opening up the economy: to cheap goods from
abroad; to foreign direct investment aiming to exploit cheap Filipino labor and
plunder natural resources; and to foreign portfolio investment seeking gains
from speculation. This causes both immediate and long-term damage to the
economy and to people’s welfare.

       In the short-term, trade and investment liberalization undermines local
producers who have already been made “uncompetitive” by decades of
foreign-imposed backwardness. Hundreds of thousands of peasants, workers
and low-paid professionals are displaced as are small domestic industrial and
commercial capitalists. And because whatever potential benefits might be
gained from foreign trade and investment are given up to ensure maximum
profits for monopoly capital, this is tantamount to the destruction of the
domestic economy’s productive capacity which gravely damages prospects
even over the long-term. The situation is made even more serious with the
plundering of the economy’s finite natural resources.

       Trade liberalization has been implemented through successive Tariff
Reform Programs (TRP): TRP I (1981-1985), TRP II (1991-1995) and TRP III
(1995-2004). These have caused average nominal tariffs in agriculture to fall
from 43.2 percent in 1981 to 11.0 percent in 2003, and in manufacturing from
39.1 percent to 5.4 percent actual trade-weighted tariffs (i.e. based on actual
imports) are even smaller and in 2004 were just 9.2 percent for agriculture
and 3.0 percent for manufacturing. This process that begun in the 1980s,
accelerated in the 1990s and is sustained in the 2000s has exposed local
producers to lower-priced competition from abroad – made cheap by
technologically-advanced or subsidized first world producers as much as on
the basis of exploited third world labor – and caused domestic agriculture and
industry to collapse. As it is, backward agricultural and pre-industrial
Philippines has the lowest tariff protections in Southeast Asia outside of

       These tariff cuts have caused the Philippine economy to become
import-dependent and export-oriented to an unprecedented degree.
Combined imports and exports were equivalent to more or less around half of
Indictment                                                                         62

GDP from the mid-1970s and throughout the 1990s. This drastically increased
with rapid trade liberalization in the 1990s where they shot up from 61 percent
of GDP in 1990 to stabilize at around 100-110 percent in the years since the
1997 Asian Crisis until today.

        Investment liberalization has been implemented through the Omnibus
Investment Code of 1987 and various Republic Acts, executive orders and
Board of Investment (BOI) official orders enacted or issued from the 1990s
until today. The end result is that the Arroyo regime grants foreign investors
wide-ranging special privileges to enable them to make as much profit as
possible in 77 so-called special economic zones and industrial estates
scattered around the country. These privileges include generous incentives
both fiscal (ex. tax credits, deductions and exemptions, non-payment of fees
and charges, etc.) and non-fiscal (ex. duty-free imports, unrestricted profit
repatriation, etc.), removal of performance requirements that might have
created benefits for the domestic economy, removal or circumvention of
Constitutional restrictions on equity ownership and land ownership, and labor
repression. The revenue foregone from fiscal incentives alone has been
estimated to come to P340.5 billion (US$6.8 billion) annually. 11 The net result
is that the regime unabashedly forsakes the right of the Filipino people to
direct and control foreign capital in the economy for domestic benefit, which is
a brazen surrender of national economic sovereignty.

        Agricultural trade liberalization has combined with state neglect to
increase food insecurity and insufficiency. Domestic food production has
fallen 27 percent from 1,509 kilograms per person per year in the period
1979-1981 to 1,100 kilograms in the period 2000-2002. 12 As a result, the
country is now more dependent than ever on foreign sources of food.
Comparing the period 1991-1995 with the period 2001-2003: the annual
volume of rice imports increased by 1,015 percent, corn by 527 percent,
vegetables by 315 percent, root crops by 405 percent, sugar and other
sweeteners by 200 percent, pork by 3,400 percent, poultry by 2,000 percent,
beef by 269 percent, and fish by 149 percent. 13 Correspondingly, the average
annual agricultural trade surplus of US$52.9 million in 1990-1994 turned into
an annual deficit of US$1,135 million in 2000-2004 and US$1,284 million in
2005. The country’s import of 1.9 million metric tons of rice in 2005 has made
it the world’s largest rice importer.

       Among the worst affected by agricultural liberalization are garlic, onion,
mongo, coffee and sugar producers who have seen not just slow growth but
actually falling production in the period 2001-2005. On the other hand, the
fastest growing agricultural sub-sectors are in export crops – bananas,
mangoes, pineapple and coconuts – where TNC agribusiness and landlord
elites dominate production and corner the benefits. The Philippines also
continues to serve as an outlet for the dumping of surplus U.S. agricultural
goods through the U.S.’s Public Law 480 program.
11 IBON calculations on data from Department of Finance (DOF).
12 Including cereals, fruits, vegetables, root crops, sugar, spices, dairy products, meat, fish and other aquatic products. IBON
computations on FAOSTAT data.
13 IBON computations on FAOSTAT data.
Indictment                                                                         63

       The flood of cheap agricultural products from abroad has deprived tens
of thousands of peasants of their livelihoods and forced them to migrate to
urban centers to seek whatever work is available. The share of agriculture in
total employment is in a long-run decline and has fallen particularly steeply in
recent years, from 37.1 percent in 2000 to 32.6 percent in 2006. 14

        Investment liberalization has increased foreign monopoly capitalist
penetration of the domestic economy with pseudo-benefits for the people far
outweighed by the net capital and resource losses. Cumulative FDI reached
US$18.7 billion in 2005 resulting in an almost threefold increase of the FDI
stock’s share in GDP, from an average of 5.5 percent in 1980-1984 to 15.7
percent in 2000-2005. 15 Net foreign direct investment averaged US$860
million per year in the period 2001-2005, with a further US$1.4 billion in the
first eight months of 2006. Total approved FDI in 2001-2005 has gone to key
sectors: for labor exploitation (manufacturing, 48.0 percent; services, including
ICT-related services, 7.9 percent), resource plunder (gas, 25.3 percent;
mining, 5.8 percent), and monopoly profiteering in public services
(communication, 4.3 percent; electricity, 3.6 percent). 16 By country, net FDI
into the country over 2001-2005 of US$4.3 billion has been mainly accounted
for by Japan (23.1 percent) and the U.S. (21.8 percent), followed by
Singapore (8.9 percent) and Hong Kong (6.3 percent). 17 All this has increased
the presence of TNCs with, for instance, TNC shares in total gross revenues
of the country’s top 1000 corporations markedly increasing from 40 percent in
2001 to 49 percent in 2005. 18 Yet foreign investment takes out more from the
economy than it brings in and capital repatriation since 1980 has already been
estimated to be US$19.6 billion. 19

        Belying the plethora of benefits supposedly brought about by FDI, the
past decade of greatly increasing FDI has also been a period of decreasing
government revenues (from 18.9 percent of GDP in 1995 to 14.8 percent in
2005), of decreasing gross domestic capital formation (from 22.5 percent of
GDP in 1995 to 15.7 percent in 2005), of rising foreign debt (from US$39.4
billion in 1995 to US$60.6 billion in 2005) and of falling exchange rates (from
P25.71 to the US$1 in 1995 to P55.09 in 2005). 20 Particularly significant and
indicative of the diminishing economic potential of the national economy are
the steady falls in the rates of gross domestic savings and gross domestic
capital formation since the mid-1970s and especially from the early 1980s.
From 28.6 percent and 32.9 percent of GDP, respectively, in 1976 these are
down to 20.1 percent and 15.7 percent in 2005.

Investment liberalization: False industrialization
14 National Statistics Office (NSO) Quarterly Labor Force Surveys, various years.
15 IBON computations on BSP data.
16 Approved investments refer to the project cost or committed investments. IBON computations on BOI data.
17 However 44.5% of FDI came from unspecified countries or for which country breakdowns are unavailable. IBON

computations on BSP data.
18 Business World Top 1000 Corporations in the Philippines, various years.
19 IBON computations on ADB and BSP data.
20 IBON (2006), “On the FDI Myths of Cha-Cha”, September 2006.
Indictment                                                                         64

       Industrial trade and foreign direct investment liberalization have
combined to undermine domestic industry and to reduce it to a low value-
added, low-employment-generating and anti-developmental link in global TNC
supply chains. TNCs have dramatically increased their domination of local
industry and increased their share of total manufacturing sales of the
country’s Top 1,000 corporations from 55.9 percent in 1999 to 75.0 percent in
2004. 21 However, the domestic manufacturing sector as a whole (i.e.
including TNCs) continues to shrink and its 24.3 percent share of GDP in
2005 is even smaller than its 24.6 percent share in 1960 over four decades
ago. The rush of cheap imports and lack of industrial policy badly ravaged an
already stunted sector: per capita production of textiles in 2000 was half that
in 1986; metal industries’ output was 17 percent lower, and that of food,
beverage and tobacco products was 10 percent less. 22

       The manufacturing sector is also increasingly unable to generate jobs
and its share in total employment has fallen from 12.1 percent in 1960 to just
9.3 percent in 2006. An average of four firms a day were either closing or
retrenching workers in the period 1995-2000, which doubled to eight firms a
day in the period 2001-2005. Just in 2005, 3,054 firms reported closures and
retrenchments that displaced 57,821 workers which is a drastic 52.1percent
increase from the year before. Local small and medium enterprises (SMEs)
are the worst hit with 2,589 SMEs going bankrupt over the period 2001-2003
and displacing an average of 34,000 workers annually.

       The largest TNCs in the country include the likes of Texas Instruments,
Royal Dutch Shell, Toshiba, Chevron-Texaco, Nestlé, Fujitsu, Philips, Zuellig
and Panasonic. Of the PhP10.0 trillion (US$200 billion) in total TNC revenues
in the country in the period 2001-2005, over half were accounted for by
Japanese (29.4 percent) and American (23.8 percent) TNCs who were
distantly followed by Dutch (7.3 percent), British (6.8 percent), Swiss (3.5
percent) and German (1.6 percent) TNCs; by sector, 79.6percent were
concentrated in just manufacturing followed by wholesale and retail trade (6.2
percent) and financial intermediation (4.9 percent). 23

        Philippine deindustrialization is a direct result of the progressive trade
liberalization under successive regimes. The country has far and away
become the most “globally-integrated” economy in Southeast Asia outside of
the small trading city-state of Singapore. The Philippines has the region’s
lowest import-weighted average tariff (3.6 percent, which is much lower than
that of Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam where this goes as high as
14-15 percent) 24 and the greatest share of parts and components in trade
(these account for 49 percent of Philippine imports and 56 percent of
exports) 25 . The Philippines also has the biggest share of parts and

21 Business World Top 1000 Corporations in the Philippines, various years.
22 Bayan Muna (2002), “Philippines 2002: People Last”, October 2002.
23 Business World Top 1000 Corporations in the Philippines, various years.
24 World Bank (2005), World Development Indicators.
25 Yumiko Okamoto (2005), “Emergence of the ‘Intra-mediate Trade’: Implications for the Asia-Pacific Region”, February 19-21,

Indictment                                                                         65

components in manufacturing exports in the whole of East Asia (over
70percent). 26 These have merely intensified the export-orientedness, import-
dependence and enclave nature of local manufacturing – where TNCs merely
exploit cheap Filipino labor – to the detriment of the domestic productive

Investment liberalization: Imperialist mining plunder

       The Philippines is among the world’s most mineral-rich areas. For
decades, the country’s mineral wealth have been dug up by big foreign TNCs
collaborating with junior domestic partners and then exported, in raw or semi-
processed form, to industrialized powers such as the U.S. and Japan. Millions
of tons of copper, nickel, chromites, zinc, gold, and silver have already been
mined with industry production and exports since 1970 amounting to over
US$25 billion worth of minerals 27 – yet the benefits from these have always
been cornered by giant foreign mining corporations and local comprador and
bureaucratic elites. Most recent estimates are that the country has 6.7 billion
metric tons of metallic minerals estimated to be worth from US$840 billion to
US$1 trillion. 28 By mineral resources per unit area, the country ranks third
worldwide in gold reserves, fourth in copper, fifth in nickel and sixth in
chromites. As it is, nine million hectares or one-third of country’s land area
has potential deposits and is targeted by the Arroyo regime for “development”.

       The WB was among those who pressed the Ramos administration for
Republic Act (RA) 7942 or the Mining Act of 1995. This law allows 100
percent foreign ownership of mining companies and gives a wide range of
incentives – grossly depriving the Filipino people of their fair and rightful share
in the nation’s mineral wealth – while shrouding minerals plunder in
supposedly “environment-friendly” requirements. The Arroyo regime has
taken mining sector liberalization even further in the last two years with its
National Policy Agenda on Revitalizing Mining in the Philippines (EO No. 270-
2004), Minerals Action Plan for mineral resources development (Memo
Circular No. 67-2004) and the creation of the Minerals Development Council
(EO No. 469-2005). It has also gone on international mining road shows
abroad and held international mining conferences in the country.

       All these are aimed at increasing foreign investment in the domestic
mining sector. Hence, the regime is also careful to take any and all steps
necessary to encourage foreign mining companies to conduct business in the
Philippines. In 2004, for instance, it exonerated Marcopper Corporation of any
wrongdoing even after it spilled four million metric tons of waste into the Boac
river and coastal areas of Marinduque island in 1996 and destroyed the

26 Prema-Chandra Athukorala and Nobuaki Yamashita (2005), “Production Fragmentation and Trade Integration: East Asia in a
Global Context”, Australian National University.
27 IBON computations on data from Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) and Mines and Geosciences Bureau (MGB).
28 National Economic and Development Authority (NEDA).
Indictment                                                                         66

livelihoods of thousands of villagers. Marcopper is partly-owned by the
Canadian mining firm Placer Dome.

       More recently, in 2005, the US$200 million Polymetallic Mining Project
of Australian subsidiary Lafayette Philippines Inc. (LPI) in Rapu-Rapu Island,
Albay province operated in disregard of environmental safeguards. Touted as
the government’s flagship mining project, the mining firm discharged waste
water with a high cyanide content that made its way to the open sea, killing
fish and exposing residents of six villages to heavy metal contamination. The
declaration of the mining site as a special economic zone also results in an
inequitable 77 percent-23 percent split of benefits from the copper, zinc, gold
and silver mined in favor of Lafayette and against the government, which is
even undermined by various fiscal and non-fiscal incentives.

        Foreign firms are similarly the primary beneficiaries of Philippine
natural gas and oil. The US$4.5 billion Malampaya Deepwater to Gas Project
in the province of Palawan – reputedly the single largest investment project in
the country’s history – was begun in 2001 by Chevron-Texaco and Shell
Philippines Exploration which evenly split 90 percent ownership of the project.
The government only has a 10 percent share through the Philippine National
Oil Company (PNOC) which it even intends to sell off to other foreign buyers.
Since these foreign firms exercise monopoly control over these fuels –
through an onerous Service Contract No. 38 – they effectively exercise
monopoly control over the entire country’s fuel production since the
Malampaya project accounts for all (100 percent) of the country’s natural gas
production and two-thirds (66 percent) of its crude oil production. Chevron’s
Malampaya operations earned it a net income of P17.0 billion (US$340.1
million) just in the period 2004-2005.

Investment liberalization: Speculation and financial instability

       Financial sector and capital account liberalization since 1991 has
created the conditions for dangerous speculative capital flows and,
correspondingly, volatile financial and exchange rate movements. This
resulted in the Philippine side of the 1997 Asian financial crisis: the build-up of
short-term debt and portfolio investments to finance speculative, real estate
and construction activities.

       The aftermath of the bursting speculative bubble was a drastic 40
percent depreciation in the peso against the dollar – from around P26 to the
U.S. dollar in 1996 to P40 in 1998 – and marked the beginning of a new
period of exchange rate volatility around a trend of more rapid depreciation.
Short-term portfolio flows have rapidly gone in out of the country in knee-jerk
reaction to rapid, if often fleeting, domestic political and economic
developments as much as to global changes such as in U.S. interest rates.
There has been US$7.0 billion in net foreign portfolio investments into the
Indictment                                                                         67

country over the 2001-2005 period, or much more than the US$4.3 billion in
net FDI over the same period. 29

         Transnational monopoly finance capital has exploited the removal of
restrictions on its entry and operations – and on the desperation of the regime
to attract foreign capital at whatever cost – to engage in widespread
speculation in foreign exchange and insider trading. The largest TNBs
operating in the country are Citibank, Hongkong and Shanghai Banking
Corporation (HSBC), Standard Chartered and Deutsche Bank, and ING Bank
and are among those seeking profits not so much through making productive
loans to Filipino enterprises than through speculative activities, lending to the
debt-ridden national government and facilitating TNCs’ cross-border
operations – especially with real domestic credit and investment contracting
sharply in the last few years. The top five TNBs declared net incomes of P5.5
billion (US$110 million) in 2004.

Debt repayments

        The Philippines’ total external debt (public and private) is US$60.5
billion as of June 2006. Of this: by debtor, 60 percent is owed by the
government and 40 percent by private debtors; by creditor, 40 percent is
borrowed from multilateral (IFIs) and bilateral agencies, 34 percent from
bondholders/noteholders, 20 percent from commercial banks and the rest
from suppliers and others. The external debt is equivalent to around 60
percent of GDP, after a recent peak of 73 percent in 2001. The damage to the
economy however does not just come from the size of the debt per se but
rather due to the payments on this and how they are made.

        The Philippines’ annual combined public and private foreign debt
service over the period 2001-2005 is at a historic high under the Arroyo
regime, both in nominal terms (US$9.6 billion a year) and as a percentage of
GDP (equivalent to 11.8percent); the annual average in the previous 20 years
and four regimes was just US$3.9 billion and 7.7 percent, respectively. 30 As it
is, the country has already made repayments accumulating to over US$127.3
billion over the period 1981-2005.

        The role of foreign debt in consolidating the Arroyo regime’s elite and
undemocratic rule is undeniable. Annual central government borrowing as
measured by annual foreign financing over the period 2001-2005 of US$1.7
billion is the largest of any administration in history; the Marcos dictatorship
had accumulated just US$218 million annually from 1972-1985. 31
Correspondingly, measured at prevailing exchange rates, annual public
foreign borrowing has almost tripled as a percentage of GDP from the Marcos
dictatorship (0.75 percent) to the current Arroyo pseudo-democracy (2.03
percent). Moreover, public borrowing is bloated further by massive additional

29 IBON computations on data from Asian Development Bank (ADB) Key Indicators and from Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas
30 IBON computations on data from Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas (BSP) and International Finance Statistics (IFS).
31 IBON computations based on data from International Monetary Fund (IMF) International Finance Statistics and Asian

Development Bank (ADB) Key Indicators 2006
Indictment                                                                         68

borrowing locally – including from foreign banks in the country – and total
public sector debt approaches P6 trillion (US$120 billion) in 2006.

         The Arroyo regime has brought the country to its worst ever fiscal
crisis; it is making the most public debt payments and is the most indebted
government in Philippine history (as well as among the most heavily indebted
in East Asia). Central government foreign and domestic debt payments in
2005 ate up 85 percent of total revenue – the highest level ever recorded –
even as the total public sector debt stock of P5.1 trillion (US$92.6 billion at
prevailing exchange rates) was equivalent to 93 percent of GDP. 32 Total
central government debt stands at P3.914 trillion (US$78.3 billion) as of
October 2006. 33 Total public sector debt – i.e. including debt of government
corporations and other government entities – meanwhile approaches P6
trillion (US$120 billion) or equivalent to some 110 percent of GDP. These do
not even yet include contingent liabilities of P552.7 billion (US$11.1 billion) as
of September 2006. 34 The regime has strictly adhered to the infamous
Marcos-era Presidential Decree 1177 on automatic appropriation for debt
servicing in national budgets which ensures that all public debt is absolutely
and unconditionally paid for.

        The fiscal crisis is rooted in the general backwardness of the economy
that limits revenue generation. The government however has aggravated this
situation with its recent policies: trade liberalization has drastically reduced
government revenues by some P100 billion (US$2 billion) annually;
investment liberalization has meant up to P171 billion (US$3.4 billion) worth of
fiscal incentives, tax exemptions and subsidies for big business annually. 35
The public debt stock has also been bloated by onerous power privatization
contracts in the 1990s and pseudo-developmental “aid”. There is also the
rampant bureaucratic corruption which bleeds already scarce government

       In nominal terms, total public debt service has increased 186 percent
from its level in 2001 to reach P784 billion (US$15.7 billion) in just the first 11
months of 2006. 36 In real per capita terms (i.e. taking inflation and population
growth into account) debt servicing doubled over the same period to P9,015
(US$180) per person in 2006. Among the measures taken by the Arroyo
regime to make these high and rising payments on massive public debt are
drastic cuts in spending on social services that have been brought to levels
lower than five years ago. Real spending per capita on education of P1,508
(US$30.16) in 2006 is 22 percent lower than in 2001, on health of P159
(US$3.18) is 25 percent lower, and on social security, welfare and
employment of P532 (US$10.64) is 9 percent lower. 37

32 At its peak in 2003, the total public sector debt stock was equivalent to 118% of GDP.
33 Bureau of Treasury (BTr) data.
34 Contingent liabilities are government-guaranteed loans and other obligations under build-operate-transfer schemes and other

similar arrangements.
35 Bayan Muna (2006), “Fiscal crisis, financial meltdown and the people”, August 10, 2004.
36 Peso values are in 2001 pesos and converted to US dollars using an exchange rate of P50:US$1.
37 IBON computations on data from the Department of Budget and Management (DBM).
Indictment                                                                         69

        Debt service has crowded out social services in the national
government budget and interest payments alone on public debt have
drastically increased their share of the budget from 16 percent in 1997, to 25
percent in 2001, to 35 percent in 2006. Total public debt service payments in
2006 are nearly five times combined education, health and housing spending.
At the same time, the government borrowed P592.4 billion (US$11.9 billion) in
the first 11 months of 2006 of which over four-fifths went straight back to
creditors in debt servicing.

        The declining spending on public education is occurring amidst long-
standing gross neglect. As it is, the Department of Education (DepEd) itself
admits that there is a lack of 20,517 teachers (assuming 45 students per
teacher), 45,775 classrooms (assuming 45 students per classroom), 3.2
million seats and 67 million textbooks in the school year 2006-2007. The
burden of health spending is also increasingly borne by those least able to
afford it. The government’s share in the country’s total health expenditure has
drastically fallen under the Arroyo regime with possibly the steepest drop in
such a short period in history. National and local government’s share in total
health expenditure was 40.6 percent in 2000 and fell by over 10 percentage
points to just 30.3 percent in 2004. Filipinos were forced to make up the
overwhelming share from private sources, primarily from additional out-of-
pocket spending. 38

       The Arroyo regime’s priorities are clear: reduced spending on vital
economic and social services to be able to unconditionally service its debt.
Central government expenditures as a percentage of GDP have fallen
between 2000 and 2005 for, among others: agriculture and agrarian reform
(from 5.1 percent in 2000 to 2.9 percent in 2005); communications, roads and
other transportation (2.3 percent to 1.0 percent), education (6.4 percent to 4.7
percent), health (0.4 percent to 0.3 percent) and housing (0.1 percent to a
negligible 0.0 percent). This was done to accommodate rising total debt
service which nearly doubled its share in GDP from 6.8 percent in 2000 to
13.4 percent in 2005.

         The Philippine tax system has been found to be the second most
regressive in Southeast Asia, next only to Malaysia. 39 This situation has been
made even worse with the IMF- and WB-dictated additional value-added tax
imposed in 2005 and projected to generate an additional P100 billion (US$2)
billion in revenues yearly. A further P175 billion (US$3.5) billion is expected to
come from “sin taxes” and additional petroleum tariffs as well as higher
government fees, charges and power rates. There were also 10,000 less
government workers in 2005 from the year before and, with P10 billion
(US$200) million in separation pay being allotted beginning in 2007, tens of
thousands more are due to be laid-off.

38National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB, 2006), Philippine National Health Accounts.
39National Tax Research Center (NTRC) study cited in “RP tax structure 'not equitable,' says study” by Michelle Remo,
Philippine Daily Inquirer, January 1, 2007.
Indictment                                                                         70

Water and power privatization, oil industry deregulation

       The Arroyo regime has continued implementing the burdensome water
and power privatization and oil industry deregulation begun in the 1990s. Yet
not only have the prices of these vital public utilities and of oil products
inexorably increased, they have increased most rapidly during the last five
years of the Arroyo regime.

        Privatization of the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System
(MWSS) in 1997 – then touted as the world’s biggest water privatization – has
caused water rates in the two resulting water service concessionaires to
increase by 344 percent (Maynilad) and 391 percent (Manila Water) over the
period 1997-2006. 40 The largest rate increases have occurred over the 2001-
2006 period – 249 percent (Maynilad) and 313 percent (Manila Water) – with
yet another round of rate hikes programmed at the start of 2007. These
prohibitive user fees are making water services ever more inaccessible to
poor households. Manila Water had a net income of P5.2 billion (US$105
million) over the 2001-2005 period while Maynilad, through mismanagement,
had a net loss of P2.5 billion (US$51 million) and was bailed out and then
reprivatized by the government in 2006.

        Power rates have soared especially for residential consumers. From
1993 to 2006, Manila Electric Company (Meralco) electricity rates per kilowatt
hour have increased by: 211 percent (residential), 187 percent (commercial)
and 165 percent (industrial). 41 The largest annual rate hikes happened under
the Arroyo regime: of residential rates by 20 percent (2006), commercial rates
by 22 percent (2001) and industrial rates by 22 percent (2001). These rate
hikes were made especially through the scheme of “power purchase
agreements” (PPAs). Undeterred, and also to be able to quickly raise cash for
the repayment of its debts, the government is pushing for the sale of its
remaining public power generation and transmission assets especially of the
National Power Corporation (Napocor). One of the first major pieces of
legislation the Arroyo regime passed upon coming to power in 2001 was the
Electric Power Industry Reform Act (EPIRA). To facilitate greater power sector
privatization, the EPIRA also specifically allowed for various “pass-on
provisions” that further drove up electricity rates.

      Power privatization is also a significant factor in aggravating public
indebtedness. The state-owned National Power Corporation (Napocor)
entered into onerous contracts in the 1990s with private so-called
independent power producers (IPPs) which, among others, has caused it to

40 Maynilad – a consortium of the French giant Suez and Benpres, a local corporation owned by one of Philippine elite families,
the Lopezes (who later supported Arroyo in her bid for the presidency) – won the west zone concession of Metro Manila.
Manila Water – a consortium of UK’s United Utilities, Japan’s Mitsubishi Corporation, the World Bank’s International Finance
Corporation (IFC), and Bechtel, which entered into a partnership with the Ayalas, another elite family, took the east zone.
Maynilad rates increased from P7.21 (US$0.14 at current exchange rates) per cubic meter in 1997 to P32.05 (US$0.64) in
2006 and Manila Water rates from P4.02 (US$0.08) to P19.72 (US$0.39). Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System
41 Residential rates increased from P2.81 (US$0.056 at current exchange rates) in 1993 to P8.75 (US$0.175) in 2006,

commercial rates from P2.84 (US$0.57) to P8.14 (US$0.163), and industrial rates from P2.66 (US$0.053) to P7.04 (US$0.141).
Manila Electric Company (Meralco).
Indictment                                                                         71

have over P500 billion (US$10 billion) in outstanding debt and P1.5 trillion
(US$30 billion) in stranded liabilities. 42 These IPPs are owned by such big
power TNCs as Mirant, Edison Global and Kepco. Privatization of the power
industry has only made electricity more expensive and inaccessible.

        The deregulated downstream Philippine oil industry is completely
dominated by foreign companies particularly Chevron-Texaco, Shell and
Aramco which control 87 percent of the market. 43 Pump prices of petroleum
products have increased over a hundred times since industry deregulation in
1997 with nearly three-fourths of these occurring under the Arroyo regime (or
an average of once a month). Overall, pump prices of gasoline have
increased 283 percent and of diesel 347 percent over the 1997-2006 period.
   From 1996-2000, gasoline prices increased 61 percent and diesel prices by
88 percent; in the last six years since 2001, under the present government
and in compliance with global oil price manipulation by the oil TNCs, they
have increased 138 percent. The oil TNCs already generate monopoly
superprofits from their global oil price increases. But in the Philippines, foreign
oil companies have even padded local pump price increases beyond global oil
price movements to generate further additional profits of P6.9 billion (US$137
million) over the period 2000-2005. 45 As it is, the three biggest oil TNCs in the
country declared a combined net income of P48.0 billion (US$960 million)
over the period 2001-2005. 46

Violations of economic and social rights of peasants and fisherfolk

       The Philippines remains a basically agricultural country. Seventy
percent (70 percent) of the labor force and 40 percent of economic activity
that enters the market is directly connected to agriculture, agricultural
processing and non-farm agricultural inputs. Agriculture’s share increases to
some three-fourths of GDP if all agriculture-related activity and food produced
for subsistence is considered. 47

       Yet rural land, credit, trading and marketing monopolies remain
ascendant in the vast countryside and tens of million of peasants and
fisherfolk subsist in conditions of severe semifeudal oppression. This is
because none of various governments’ so-called land and agrarian reform

42 The onerous provisions included: a) Napocor paying for power produced whether or not the power was actually used (i.e. a
take-or-pay provision); b) the Philippine government absorbing loans if the IPPs defaulted; c) Napocor absorbing fluctuations in
the peso-dollar rate; and d) Napocor supplying and paying for the fuel used in plant operations.
43 The remaining 13% is nonetheless also taken up by other TNCs such as Total Fina Elf and SHV Netherlands. Strictly

speaking, the government owns 60% of the oil firm Petron in which Aramco is the other partner – however the government in
practice still takes its lead in terms of pricing from the three big oil TNCs and does not on its own exercise any leadership in oil
product pricing.
44 Gasoline was P9.42 (US$0.19 at current exchange rates) per liter in 1996 and diesel P7.42 (US$0.15); gasoline increased to

P15.16 (US$0.30) in 2001 and P36.05 (US$0.72) in 2006, and diesel to P13.96 (US$0.28) in 2001 and P33.17 (US$0.66) in
2006. Department of Energy (DOE).
45 IBON computations based on DOE data.
46 Business World Top 1000 Corporations in the Philippines, various years.
47 Reported during the “Workshop on Policies to Strengthen Productivity in the Philippines”, AIM Conference Center, Makati,

Metro Manila, June 27, 2005.
Indictment                                                                         72

programs – there have been five in as many decades 48 – have genuinely
addressed the basic problem of serious land and rural inequities. The
Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) implemented and dragging
on since 1988 is only the latest in a long series of bogus programs unable to
deliver on the essential demand of “free land to the tiller”. The labors of poor
landless and land-scarce peasants continue to be appropriated by landlord
and rural elites, as has been the case for countless generations.

         Domestic agriculture also remains bereft of real government support –
government spent less than 4 percent of its 2006 budget on agriculture – and
is extremely backward. 49 Some 2.4 million out of a total of 4.8 million farms
still rely on plows and there are only 11,500 tractors and 700 harvester-
threshers in use nationwide. 50 Only 2.9 million hectares or 30 percent of the
country’s total farm area is irrigated, with government-provided irrigation
system only accounting for 27 percent of irrigated farms. 51 Over 70 percent of
the country’s poor live in rural areas. 52

        A recent infamous case is that of the 6,453 hectare Hacienda Luisita in
Tarlac province of Central Luzon. The landlord Cojuangco family was able to
evade agrarian reform in the late 1980s by entering into a so-called stock
distribution option in which farmworkers supposedly became co-owners with
the Cojuangcos of Hacienda Luisita Incorporated (HLI). Yet this resulted in
farmworkers eventually getting a rate of just P194 (US$3.90) per day that,
with deductions, in some cases reduced to a net take of P9.50 (US$0.19) per
day – further aggravated with workdays forcibly reduced to just one paid work
day a week.

       Despite decades of successive agrarian reform programs, less than a
third of landowners still own more than 80 percent of agricultural land. Land
ownership declined from 63 percent of total farm area in 1971 to 51 percent in
2002; the number of farms fell from 58 percent of the total number of farms in
1971 to 48 percent in 2002. 53 Put another way, 52 percent of all farms in the
country covering 51 percent of total farm area remain under tenancy, lease,
and other forms of tenurial arrangement. Official land distribution figures are
bloated in various ways to cover up declining land ownership and the
persistence of tenancy, lease and other tenurial arrangements. The peasantry
is moreover laboring with backward technologies. Some 2.4 million farms out
of a total of 4.8 million still rely on hand tools, plows and carabaos (water
buffalos); only 30 percent of the total farm area is irrigated. 54

48 Major land reform legislation in the country started with the Agricultural Tenancy Act of 1954, Land Reform Act of 1955 and
the Agricultural Land Reform Code of 1963. Following the Agrarian Reform Code of 1971 and Presidential Decree No. 27 (PD
27) in 1972 under the Marcos regime, agrarian reform took organizational form with the creation of a Department of Agrarian
Reform. The most recent legislation is Republic Act (RA) 6657 or the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law (CARL) of 1988
initiating the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP) which has been ongoing for 18 years now.
49 Department of Budget and Management (DBM), 2007 National Budget.
50 Data on plows from National Statistics Office (NSO) 2002 Census of Agriculture and on agricultural machinery from

51 National Statistics Office (NSO, 2004), 2002Census of Agriculture.
52 The figure is based on data from the 2000 Family Income and Expenditure Survey (FIES) of the NSO. There is no urban-

rural breakdown on the magnitude of families below the poverty threshold in the more recent 2003 FIES.
53 NSO, 2002 Census of Agriculture.
54 Ibid.
Indictment                                                                         73

       The policy of neoliberal “globalization” is hostile to genuine land reform.
In this context, the Arroyo regime is deliberately neglecting agrarian reform
and actively encouraging even greater reversals. For 2007 the main thrust of
the so-called Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) is not even going to be
ensuring land distribution but rather to consolidate some 1.8 million hectares
of agrarian reform lands for contract-growing arrangements and agribusiness
ventures, especially with foreign TNCs engaged in the production of cash
crops for export.

       Yet while corporate agribusiness delivers profits to its owners, this is at
the expense of the laboring peasants and farmworkers who face severe
exploitation. A case in point is the U.S. subsidiary Dole Philippines which
among others has a 21,443 hectare plantation with pineapple, banana and
asparagus in Southern Mindanao. Since the 1990s, thousands of peasants
have been forced to cede their land to Dole through lease arrangements
plotted with local agricultural traders and usurers. These and many others
were also forced to enter into onerous contract growership arrangements that
charge high prices for Dole-provided inputs and pay low-buying prices for
products. Dole, moreover, extensively uses hazardous chemicals while having
unsafe methods of waste disposal. These have polluted the area around the
company’s cannery plant and its plantations, causing serious health problems
to workers and citizens of the surrounding communities. Dole has also rapidly
contractualized its workforce to the point that only 27 percent of its 20,000
workforce are regular workers allowed to unionize and eligible for legally-
mandated benefits. At the same time, contractual workers are forced to deal
with oppressive “labor cooperatives” that charge exorbitant fees, delay wage
payments and effectively oblige usurious loans.

Violations of economic and social rights of workers

        One of the main attractions of the Philippines for foreign investors is
the profit they can make from exploiting Filipino workers through low wages,
long working hours, strict output quotas and oppressive working conditions. In
the process, millions of Filipinos are denied decent work and stable
livelihoods. The depressing effect on workers’ wages of historic
unemployment and underemployment – i.e., indicators of an excess labor
force – is evident.

       The real minimum wage of workers has been persistently insufficient
for even minimally-decent living. Combined basic minimum wages and
emergency cost-of-living-allowances (ECOLA) have not kept up with the daily
family cost of living. In the National Capital Region (NCR), the estimated living
wage for the average family (with six members) is PhP766 (US$15.32) as of
November 2006 which means a monthly living wage of P19,916 (US$398). 55
Yet the daily nominal minimum wage plus ECOLA in the NCR is just PhP350

55 Living wage data from the National Wages and Productivity Council (NWPC), converted to US dollars using an exchange
rate of P50:US$1. Monthly living wage multiplies daily living wage by 26 days.
Indictment                                                                         74

(US$7.00) which means a monthly wage received, times 26 working days, of
just P9,100 (US$182) – for a monthly wage gap for minimum wage earners of
P10,816 (US$216). Put another way, the legislated basic in the NCR is just 46
percent or not even half of what is needed by the average family of six for
simple living. As it is, the monthly minimum wage actually received nationwide
in 2004 ranged from just P4,829 (US$97) for the lowest paid unskilled workers
to P18,133 (US$363) for the highest paid supervisors and foremen. 56 In the
poorest regions, wages fall short by 67 percent (agricultural) to 70 percent
(non-agricultural) for decent living.

       These trends starkly manifest at the macroeconomic level. National
output has been expanding with GDP increasing in absolute terms by 67
percent between 1990 and 2005 (at constant 1985 prices). Increasing labor
productivity is a significant factor with the labor productivity index, or the ratio
of national output to employment, increasing 13 percent between 1990 and
2004. However total non-agricultural employee compensation has fallen 13
percent over that same period, with the steepest fall in manufacturing
compensation which dropped 51 percent. These are consistent with the
decades-long “globalization”-induced trend of a falling share of labor in
national income – which has drastically dropped by 23 percentage points from
60 percent in 1979 to just 37 percent in 2004 (with capital correspondingly
increasing its share from 40 percent to 63 percent). 57

        These macroeconomic statistics are reflected at the firm level in vicious
labor repression and severe worker exploitation. Over 600 workers at a plant
of the giant food transnational Nestlé in Laguna, Southern Luzon have been
fighting a five-year struggle that began over issues arising from their
Collective Bargaining Agreement (CBA). Since the struggle started in January
2002, the Swiss TNC has used company goons, police and the military in
repeated violent attempts to disperse the strikers and two of the union’s
leaders, including its president, have already been assassinated while others
are facing threats, harassment and surveillance. Nestlé Philippines has
consistently been among the top 15 most profitable corporations in the
Philippines and in 2004 had a net income of P6.1 billion (US$123 million).

         Workers at Toyota have also come under attack in their efforts to
assert their right to self-organization and to build a union. In 2001, Toyota
summarily dismissed 233 union members including all 15 union officers.
Following a threat by Toyota that it would withdraw its investments from the
Philippines, the Arroyo administration intervened and railroaded the
“legalization” of the dismissals in violation of prescribed legal processes. In
the last five years, pickets have been violently dispersed and workers and
their families have been harassed and detained. Toyota is the country’s
biggest motor vehicle manufacturer and in 2004 the combined net income of
all its Philippine corporate identities was P657 million (US$13 million).

56National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB), 2005 Philippine Statistical Yearbook.
57Labor’s share is the share of total labor income– i.e. the sum of labor compensation and derived labor income from net
household operating surplus – in GDP. National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB).
Indictment                                                                         75

        The dismal domestic jobs situation has forced millions of Filipinos to
migrate and find work abroad – temporarily and permanently, legally and
illegally. The overseas Filipino worker (OFW) phenomenon today is on a scale
unparalleled in the country’s history, and is such as to have severe and
adverse implications. Millions of OFWs face oppressive working conditions
and employer abuses overseas even as their families face long periods of
separation and deal with deep disruptions in family lives. The national
economy is also drained of precious human resources with OFW labor
actually contributing more to building the economies of their host countries
than of the Philippines.

Violations of economic and social rights of urban poor (slum dwellers)

       There are at the very least 11-13 million urban poor residents in the
Philippines. 58 The urban poor (or slum dwellers) face the same problems of
other Filipinos in terms of the dearth of livelihoods, hunger, lack of social
services and inaccessibility of public utilities. In addition, they also face
serious problems of demolitions of their homes, loss of property, and physical
and economic displacement following forcible evictions. Urban poor slums in
Manila can have as many as 70,000 to 100,000 residents living in small,
cramped and unhygienic communities of shanties made from scrap.

       There have been massive dislocations in recent years. Since early
2005, some 29,000 families from Metro Manila and Bulacan province have
lost their homes due to the government’s Philippine National Railways (PNR)
North Rail-South Rail Linkage Project. 59 If the projected figure of 80,000
families to be evicted materializes, this would be the single largest
government-initiated displacement of communities in the country’s history.

        The alliance of urban poor groups Kadamay, meanwhile, estimates that
about half a million urban poor dwellers are threatened by various government
privatization and modernization projects in the National Capital Region,
Central and Southern Luzon. 60 Among the biggest of these projects are the
North Rail-South Rail Linkage Project, Manila North Harbor port privatization,
Batangas City port expansion, and the C-6, STAR and CALABARZON
highway projects. Evictees to date have not consistently been relocated even
as relocation sites in nearby Bulacan and Laguna provinces, among others,
have been far from livelihood opportunities and have deficient or otherwise
exorbitantly expensive water, electricity and housing.

Violations of economic and social rights of children and women
58 Rough estimate using the figure of 9.6 million magnitude of poor in urban areas in the 2000 Family Income and Expenditure
Survey (FIES) as the base and inflating this using annual population growth rates.
59 Centre on Housing Rights and Eviction (COHRE), Geneva.
60 Dabet Castaneda (2006), “Urban Poor Yearender: RP is 2006 Housing Rights Violator”,
Indictment                                                                         76

        The worsening economic and social conditions reflect in the condition
of children and women who comprise the most vulnerable sector in society. In
terms of magnitude, the biggest number of poor is found among them: 14.1
million children and 12.2 million women. 61

       Improvements in the child mortality rate in the early 1990s have
completely reversed under the Arroyo regime. In 1990, there were 24 deaths
among children aged 1-4 years old per 1,000 population; this improved to 14
deaths in 1998 but then took a severe turn for the worse in 2003 when it
increased to 40 deaths per 1,000 population. 62 Extreme systemic poverty and
hunger has also resulted in 6.1 million Filipino children being underweight: 3.7
million below five years old and 2.4 million between 6 to 10 years old (or 25
percent of children in this age group).

         Millions of children are unable to obtain decent education. Out of every
100 children who enter Grade 1 at six or seven years of age: only 66 percent
will finish elementary school, only 43 percent high school, and only 14 percent
college. 63 The quality of this education is even questionable. In 2003, 16
percent of Filipinos between 10-64 years old or 9.2 million Filipinos were
found to be functionally illiterate – i.e., unable to read, write, subtract and add,
or understand simple instructions. Even at the high school level, only 7
percent of students had mastered English, only 2 percent mastered Science
and only 16 percent mastered Math. 64

        And yet under the Arroyo regime, the number of children in school is
even dropping dramatically especially at the high school level. In 2002, 92.2
percent of children 6-12 years old were in elementary school and 96.8 percent
of children aged 13-16 years old were in high school. However this dropped to
91.4 percent and 63.0 percent, respectively, in 2004. 65 Drop-out rates that
had been steadily improving since the 1990s took a turn for the worse and
increased from 6.5 percent in 2001 to 8.9 percent in 2003. Many of these
children dropped out of school because their families could no longer afford to
support their education and are thus themselves forced to find work as well.
By 2006, some 2.5 million children aged 5 to 17 were working either to
augment family income or fend for themselves. 66 Over three-fourths of these
children were working as laborers and unskilled workers in psychologically
and physically hazardous conditions. The number of street children
nationwide was estimated at 1.5 million in 2004.

       Women comprise almost half of the population yet they bear a
disproportionate share of the burden of the economic crisis. They are
unrelieved of domestic tasks – spending more hours per week than men in

61 Latest figures using official poverty lines and year 2000 data. National Statistical Coordination Board (NSCB, 2006),
Development of Poverty Statistics for the Basic Sectors.
62 Department of Health (DOH, 2003), National Demographic and Health Survey 2003.
63 Department of Education (DepEd), FY 2006 Budget Proposal, December, 2005.
64 2003 Functional Literacy, Education and Mass Media Survey (FLEMMS).
65 National Statistics Office (NSO) Annual Poverty Indicators Survey, 2002 and 2004.
66 Bureau of Labor and Employment Statistics (BLES).
Indictment                                                                         77

combined economic, child care and family tasks – even as they bear the most
immediate responsibility of making meager household budgets meet their
families’ needs. The demands on their time and energy are great. When they
enter the work force it is as poorly-paid second-class labor. Indeed the
tendency has been for women to account for more and more of the
desperately poor – the “feminization of poverty”.

      Increasingly difficult economic conditions have forced women into
whatever work is available for them. Some 40 percent of jobs are taken by
women – with two-thirds of employed women being married – however female
unemployment rates are higher for females than males and they tend to find
work more in low-paying service jobs (i.e. as retail trade salespersons,
domestic workers, public school teachers, etc.) than in professional jobs (i.e.
as managers, engineers, doctors). Women also only take up 38 percent of
wage and salary jobs, while accounting for 57 percent of unpaid family work.
The OFW phenomenon is also a starkly female phenomenon: 72 percent of
the OFWs deployed in 2005 were women, mainly going to work as domestic
workers, entertainers and caregivers. 67

        Women’s reproductive health needs are also grossly neglected by the
ineffective public health system. In 2002 only 37 percent of mothers received
at least the minimum two doses of tetanus toxoid while pregnant. In urban
areas only 54 percent of mothers delivered in a health facility. 68 In rural areas
just 22 percent delivered in a health facility, while 59 percent delivered
unassisted by a doctor, nurse or midwife. 69 Anemia is a major health problem
among pregnant and lactating women at 44 percent and 42 percent,
respectively; in addition, 27 percent of pregnant women and 12 percent of
lactating women are underweight. 70

Violations of economic and social rights of indigenous peoples

       The estimated 12-15 million indigenous peoples in the Philippines
comprise some 15 percent of the total population and are spread across
Luzon (33 percent), the Visayas (6 percent) and Mindanao (61 percent); they
are assimilated into the mainstream economic, political and socio-cultural
setup of Philippine society in various degrees. They have ancestral territories
in at least 50 of the country’s 79 provinces of which the state recognizes
about five million hectares. 71 However their continuing survival as distinct
peoples is under threat and their rights to ancestral domain, to practice and
develop their indigenous socio-political systems, and to self-determination are
under attack.

67 Philippine Overseas Employment Administration (POEA, 2006), OFW Global Presence: A Compendium of Overseas
Employment Statistics.
68 Department of Health (DOH, 2003), National Demographic and Health Survey 2003.
69 Ibid.
70 Food and Nutrition Research Institute-Department of Science and Technology (FNRI-DOST, 2004), Sixth National Nutrition

Surveys, Initial Results.
71 National Commission on Indigenous Peoples (NCIP).
Indictment                                                                         78

       The most basic rights of national minorities pertain to their ancestral
domain. Yet the Regalian Doctrine which underpins Philippine land law
presumes that all natural resources in the country belong to the state. In
practice this has given the government legal mandate to make public land
available for mining and forest concessions, agricultural plantations, and
industrial and commercial use as it wishes. Like all the regimes before it, the
Arroyo regime systematically refuses to genuinely recognize the right to
ancestral domain of national minorities and, especially with the liberalization
of the mining industry, even promotes their physical and economic
displacement. This has intensified the disintegration of their livelihoods,
culture and communities.

        Among the 23 priority mining projects of the government estimated to
be worth up to US$6.5 billion, 18 are in identified ancestral lands: ten in
Mindanao; one each in Mindoro and Palawan; and six in Cordillera and the
rest of Northern Luzon. Many of these have already grossly violated
indigenous communities’ rights. The Canadian mining firm TVI Pacific has
forcibly relocated and demolished homes of Subanon in their ancestral
domain in Zamboanga del Norte, and hundreds of local villagers resisting
relocation have been threatened both legally and by government paramilitary
forces. Local farmers and fishermen have also reported damaged crops,
reduced fish yields and skin infections due to pollution from the mine. As in
other mining sites across the country, increasing militarization of the
community has also resulted in increasing incidents of human rights
violations. 72 In Nueva Vizcaya and Quirino provinces, Australian firm Climax
Mining Ltd. – which holds one of the biggest gold and copper exploration
portfolios in the country – encroached on the ancestral domain of Ifugaos and
Bugkalots and displaced hundreds of families. The company also used deceit
and force to obtain certificates of free prior and informed consent (FPIC).

       Various indigenous peoples’ communities are also adversely affected
by large dam projects under the Philippine Energy Plan (PEP) 2000-2009: the
Tumanduk people by the Pan-ay River Dam; Ifugao and Bugkalot
communities by the Casecnan Dam; Ifugao communities by the Matuno River
Development Project; and Dumagat and Remontado communities by the
Laiban Dam.

Destruction of the environment

        The Arroyo regime’s prioritization of monopoly capitalist and domestic
elite profits has also involved a willful neglect of the adverse environmental
consequences of industrial, agricultural and resource-extractive operations.
TNCs spend as little as they can for environmental safety measures to be
able to maximize their profits, which the state accommodates through
inadequate monitoring, low penalties for violators and the unchecked
corruption of government regulators. Environmental destruction and

72 Rodolfo Stavenhagen (2003), Human Rights and Indigenous Issues in the Philippines, Report for 59th United Nations

Commission on Human Rights.
Indictment                                                                         79

degradation has continued uncontrolled and unabated, causing hardships,
loss of livelihood and health problems for peasants, fisherfolk, indigenous
peoples and urban poor. Among the most recent environmental disasters
have been continuing toxic mine spills in the Cordillera region, in northern
Philippines. Every day, an estimated 160,000 tons of mine tailings find their
way into rivers, lakes and irrigation systems across the country. 73 There have
also been massive floods and landslides in heavily deforested areas of
Southern Tagalog, Bicol and Eastern Visayas regions.

       The Cordillera region in Northern Luzon contains about 25percent of
the country’s gold ore and 39 percent of its copper ore. Mining permits and
applications already cover some two-thirds of the region’s total land area. In
recent years the bulk of Philippine gold production has come from mines in
the region operated by Lepanto Corp. (which has the Australian mining firm
CRA and the Canadian firm Ivanhoe Mines as partners) and Benguet
Corporation (with U.S. mining firms Cede & Co., Pacific & Co., Kray & Co and
BHP) and. Philex Corporation (with Philex Gold, Inc. of Canada) in turn is the
region’s main copper producer.

        Acid mine drainage from Lepanto mining operations into the Abra river
and its tributaries has adversely affected three communities with residents
suffering the effects of high levels of exposure to lead, mercury and cyanide –
including severe skin, eye, nasal and gastrointestinal symptoms. Communities
have also complained of decreased agricultural and fishing yield, loss of plant
life and death of domestic animals. The large-scale operations of Benguet
Corporation and Philex Corporation have likewise been reported to be
discharging toxic wastes and tailings, and of creating serious health and
environmental hazards. These three corporations also have operations
outside the Cordillera region with similarly poor environmental records in
Zambales, Negros Occidental, Compostela Valley and Zamboanga del Norte.

        Large-scale logging over decades has destroyed the country’s forests.
In the mid-1960s, about 45 percent of the country’s total land areas was still
forested. However today, forest cover is down to 4.7 million hectares, or less
than 16 percent of the country’s total land area. 74 Moreover, forest cover in
erstwhile forest land is down to just 34 percent and 46 percent of total eroded
areas suffer moderate to severe erosion. 75 Yet by 2003 some 3.5 million
hectares of forests were covered by various government tenurial agreements
that effectively pave the way for corporate logging and further deforestation –
including Timber License Agreements (TLAs) covering some 60 percent of the
remaining 800,000 hectares left of primary or old-growth forests that are
critical habitats of biological diversity and endemic hardwood tree species. 76

73 Antonio Tujan and Ros-B Guzman (2006), Globalizing Philippine Mining,
74 Forest Management Bureau (FMB, 2002), Development of Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management in the
75 Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR, 2002), Draft Framework Plan for Environment and Natural

Resources Management.
76 These include 2.3 million hectares under so-called Community Based Forest Management Agreements (CBFM) and

Industrial Forest Management Agreements (IFMA) and over 500,000 hectares under Timber License Agreements (TLAs).
Center for Environmental Concerns (CEC, 2006), “MTPDP, SONA and the State of the Philippine Environment” citing FMB
Indictment                                                                         80

As it is, tens of thousands have recently been killed or displaced by massive
landslides in Quezon, Albay and Leyte provinces following typhoons striking
heavily deforested areas.

Bureaucratic corruption

       Bureaucratic corruption is endemic to the Arroyo regime and while
there are varying estimates of its extent, they are all scandalously high. There
is an estimate that the equivalent of up to 20 percent of each central
government budget is diverted to graft and corruption – which would for
example mean P200 billion or US$4 billion just in 2006. 77 The government’s
chief graft-buster in turn has estimated P1.2 trillion (US$24 billion) lost over
the period 2001-2005. 78 The Arroyo regime itself has been implicated in
various cases, although none of which have been brought to court. These
have included instances of foreign capital allegedly paying bribes to corner
profitable opportunities in the country.

       A government contract in 2001 with Argentine contractor Industrias
Metalurgicas Pescarmona Sociedad Nonima (IMPSA) to rehabilitate the
Kalayaan-Caliraya-Botocan hydropower plants was reportedly “facilitated” by
US$14 million in pay-offs. 79 The “civil society” CODE-NGO earned P1.4 billion
(US$28 billion) from brokering the issue of so-called PEACE Bonds allegedly
in connivance with its connections in government. There was supposedly a
P536 million (US$10.7 million) overprice of the P1.1 billion (US$22 billion) 5.1
km Diosdado Macapagal Boulevard, named after the father of President
Gloria Macapagal- Arroyo. Officials of the German firm Fraport AG said that
they were asked for pay-offs of between US$20-70 million by a law firm
closely linked to President Arroyo to obtain the contract for a US$425 million
PIATCO-Ninoy Aquino International Airport (NAIA) Terminal 3 project.

        The so-called “Jose Pidal exposé” was about the presidential couple
amassing hundreds of millions of pesos in ill-gotten wealth through unreported
and unused campaign funds, properties abroad, and monthly kickbacks from
government-owned and -controlled corporations (GOCCs). President Arroyo
also allegedly spent some P7.3 billion (US$146 million) in government funds
in her campaign for the 2004 presidential elections. This included P729 million
(US$15 million) from a non-existent government fertilizer fund.


77 Bayan Muna (2006), “Fiscal crisis, financial meltdown and the people”, August 10, 2004. See also USAID’s Country Program
for the Philippines, 2001-2004 which noted “[Estimates] that government spending is inflated by as much as 20 percent, or
roughly US$2 billion a year, due to procurement irregularities.”
78 Ombudsman Ma. Merceditas Gutierrez (2006), “Seminar on Corruption for Quezon City Barangay Captains”, May 23, 2006.
79 Allegedly divided between Mark Jimenez (US$7 M), Pres. Arroyo herself and her husband (US$4 M), Justice Secretary

Hernando Perez (US$2 M) and others.
Indictment                                                                         81

                    General and specific allegations
      of gross and systematic violations of the rights of the people
              to national self-determination and liberation

        The enjoyment of the right to national self-determination and liberation
has never been a collective reality to the Filipino people because of the long-
standing subjugation of the country by colonial powers who ruled the country
in collaboration with the local elite. Spain colonized the Philippines from 1571
to 1898, or for more than three centuries, followed by U.S. imperialism in 1898
until 1946, the year the Americans granted “independence” to the country but
not after establishing a neo-colonial relationship. U.S. imperialism continued
its domination of the Philippines economically and militarily and by instituting
elite-controlled puppet governments that became subservient to U.S.’
economic and military objectives in the country, in East Asia and beyond.
Throughout this long period of colonialism and neo-colonialism, the Filipino
people have carried out heroic revolts, uprisings, revolutionary struggles and
anti-imperialist movements in order to free the country from foreign
domination and establish a truly democratic government.

       Today, the U.S. has once again established a military presence in the
country expedited no less by the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) of 1998
and other subsequent bilateral security agreements, war exercises, special
operations trainings and covert and overt missions under the guise of the
global war on terrorism.

        When the “war against terrorism” was extended by the Bush
administration to the Philippines and the rest of Southeast Asia in the
aftermath of 9/11, President Gloria M. Arroyo immediately expressed her
support and offered the Philippine territory for use by the U.S. forces in the
military campaign. With full U.S. military support, Mrs. Arroyo also unleashed
an all-out war on so-called “terrorist groups” in the country using the most
vicious attacks against the Communist Party of the Philippines-New People’s
Army-National Democratic Front of the Philippines (CPP-NPA-NDFP) as well
as the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF). Characteristic of all counter-
insurgency campaigns in past regimes, Mrs. Arroyo’s security forces have
conducted brazen political assassinations of hundreds of activists, human
rights defenders, church leaders, lawyers and legislative volunteers on the
mere suspicion of being members of the revolutionary movement’s “front
organizations” even as the same forces are also sowing a “reign of terror” in
the rural countryside.

       Ignoring the far-reaching implications of her role in the U.S. armed
aggression to the country’s own security as well as national sovereignty, Mrs.
Arroyo accepted hook, line and sinker Mr. Bush’s prefabricated lies in
launching his “war against terrorism,” and supported it in violation of the 1987
Philippine Constitution provision that renounces war as an instrument of
foreign policy. Mrs. Arroyo also stood on the side of Mr. Bush in using this war
of aggression as a unilateral and pre-emptive action in violation of the UN
Charter and other international laws.
Indictment                                                                         82

       By her imprudent support for the war of aggression, the President was
acting contrary to the rights of peoples of countries against which the war was
launched particularly with regard to their territorial integrity and self-
determination. Consequently, she also placed the Filipino people in grave
danger due to possible retaliations from the countries that became either
victims or future targets of Bush’s war as well as from other groups who might
have been hurt, displaced or threatened, in one way or the other, by this act of
aggression and grave injustice.

       Subsequently, the military collaboration between the U.S. superpower
and the Arroyo puppet government led to the forging of new iniquitous and
onerous security agreements under the umbrella of the 1951 Mutual Defense
Treaty (MDT) and the 1998 Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).

         The continued implementation of the 1951 MDT, the imposition of the
1998 VFA, and other security agreements forged by the Bush and Arroyo
governments since 2001 violate the Filipino people’s rights to national
sovereignty and self-determination. They were concluded in disregard for the
Filipino people’s fundamental rights especially because crimes have been
committed by both the U.S. and Arroyo governments and their security forces
- all in the name of these unequal and lop-sided treaties and agreements and
their joint “counter-terrorism” programs. The fundamental rights of the people
that have been violated include, among others, the right to national self-
determination and national liberation and to be free from any colonial, neo-
colonial or foreign intervention; the rights of liberation movements and their
revolutionary forces to the protection of the international humanitarian law; the
right to existence and not to be subjected to any form of political persecution;
as well as the people’s right to national sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Such violations and crimes committed – some of which directly involved U.S.
forces or were perpetrated largely with U.S. military aid – have been mounting
and were done with impunity as the Arroyo regime enforced state terrorism on
the Filipino people in collusion with the global superpower.

Unequal security agreements and the current U.S.-directed
global war on terror

       The 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty and the 1998 Visiting Forces

        In collaboration with the Philippine President, the U.S. government
continues to invoke the 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) and the 1998
Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA).
Indictment                                                                         83

       A Cold War relic, the 1951 MDT provided for a mutual defense
response 80 to an external attack against any of the two countries but nowhere
does it call for U.S. automatic retaliation to an external aggression against the
Philippines. 81 As a party to the MDT, the Philippine government under its
various Presidents had been under obligation to support the U.S.’ wars of
aggression in Korea (1951-1953), in Indochina (1960s-1975), and in the first
Gulf War of 1991. Aside from sending Filipino troops to the first two wars
mentioned, the Philippine government also allowed the use of U.S. military
bases in the Philippines to launch punitive air and naval attacks on the
peoples of Korea, Vietnam and Iraq.

        The MDT is now being invoked as a basis for the VFA and - in the
guise of “close security cooperation” between the two countries 82 - in the “war
against terrorism” waged by U.S. President George W. Bush, Jr. and
supported by Gloria M. Arroyo. 83 Signed on Feb. 10, 1998 and ratified by the
Philippine Senate in 1999, the agreement tramples upon the Filipino people’s
right to national sovereignty and territorial integrity, grants American soldiers
and civil employees of the U.S. Department of Defense visiting the Philippines
special rights and privileges, 84 and runs counter to the country’s own laws
particularly on criminal justice and equal protection of the law.

      The fact that the VFA was negotiated by the U.S. and Philippine
governments under secrecy and was publicized only after it was signed
showed contempt for the country’s constitutional procedures governing
agreements and treaties with foreign governments; constituted an act of
betrayal of the rights of the Filipino people and violated the principles of
presidential accountability and transparency.

   Article IV of the Treaty (signed Aug. 30, 1951) provides: “Each Party recognizes that an armed
attack in the Pacific Area on either of the Parties would be dangerous to its own peace and safety and
declared that it would act to meet the common dangers in accordance with its constitutional processes.”
   The 1951 MDT was actually an imposition upon the Filipino people to force them to support U.S.
armed intervention in the Korean War, in the Indochina War (late 1950s-1975) and other wars and
armed conflicts in Asia Pacific and neighboring regions. Along with the onerous 1947 Military Bases
Agreement (MBA), it was used to justify America’s use of its military facilities in the Philippines to
launch offensive air and naval bombings as well as refueling and repair during the Korean War, the
Indochina War and the 1991 Desert Storm war against Iraq.
   In defiance of the Filipino people’s opposition, the VFA was ratified by the Philippine Senate in
1999 at a time when Gloria M. Arroyo was also serving as vice president.
   In the first place, the MDT could not be invoked since it could not be proved that an “external
power” launched the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks on the United States, assuming that it was indeed an
“external attack” and not a conspiracy from within the U.S., as many theories indicate. It was the U.S.
that attacked Afghanistan and later, Iraq, showing no credible proof that would link either of the two
countries to 9/11.

  The VFA is in fact a form of Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA), although different from the SOFA of other
countries with U.S. bases. When the U.S. still had military bases in the country, the SOFA was included in the RP-
U.S. Military Bases Agreement.
Indictment                                                                         84

       Furthermore, the VFA should not be considered binding since it was
never ratified by the U.S. Senate. Under U.S. constitutional law, an executive
agreement is not considered a treaty that binds the U.S. government. 85

        The VFA is also contrary to international norms under which fair
agreements or treaties are crafted since it was an imposition on the Filipino
people by the U.S. in order to use the country’s ports, training facilities and
logistical bases for its wars of aggression and intervention in different parts of
the world, especially in Asia Pacific and the Gulf Region. 86 The agreement
virtually makes the Philippines a support and training base for current U.S.
military operations in Afghanistan, Iraq and elsewhere, as well as for the
military encirclement of China, North Korea and other potential “military
competitors” in the region. The Balikatan (shoulder-to-shoulder) war exercises
between U.S. and Philippine troops have been held all over the Philippines,
with some 11,000 U.S. troops involved in exercises in 2006 alone. 87

      The American military “visits” are supposed to be temporary and are
made from “time to time.” These “visits” cannot be described as “temporary”
since many U.S. troops have been staying indefinitely. 88 Yet there are already
permanent fixtures built and used by the U.S. forces. For instance, a
permanent American camp is now even built inside the Southern Command
camp in Zamboanga City. Moreover, the VFA does not set the number of
American troops to be designated in the Philippines within a period. It may
reach hundreds or thousands of American soldiers.

       The “activities” of the American troops in the Philippines will be
approved by the RP-U.S. Mutual Defense Board (MDB) - which is not under
the jurisdiction of the Philippine government, according to Domingo Siazon,
the Foreign Affairs Secretary of the Philippines who signed the VFA in 1998.

      The VFA, furthermore, violates the Filipino people’s national
sovereignty and self-determination and other fundamental rights because:

        First, “extra-territoriality” is awarded to U.S. soldiers in the whole
Philippine territory. Under Article VIII of the VFA, there is no limitation to the
“access” of the American troops in the Philippines, even in the remotest areas
in the country. 89

   Philippine Daily Inquirer, Dec. 15, 2006, quoting former Senate President Jovito Salonga.
   Various reports say that the American forces are actually in the Philippines for training, to test the
capability of the AFP and other security forces in counter-insurgency, as well as to conduct
intelligence, surveillance and other covert operations.
   IBON Facts and Figures, “The glue that binds,” Table 5. Monitored US-RP Military Exercises, 2006.
June 15, 2006.
   As said so, by former Senate President Jovito Salonga and Sen. Wigberto Tanada who led a group of
lawyers including retired Court of Appeals Justice Jose de la Rama and international law professor
Harry Roque, Jr. in filing a petition before the Supreme Court Jan. 19, 2007 to declare the VFA
unconstitutional since it does not recognize the court’s rules of procedure on a rape case that found a
U.S. Marine guilty of rape.
   So far, from 2002-2004, there had been 12,000 U.S. troops under the U.S. PACOM entering the
Philippines under the cover of “war exercises,” “special operations training,” “disaster relief and
Indictment                                                                         85

       Second, the VFA exempts American soldiers from certain Philippine
regulations. Under Articles III, IV, VII, and VIII of the VFA, special privileges,
which are denied to ordinary Filipino citizens, are conferred upon the
American troops. Assigned or visiting American soldiers need not abide by
laws and regulations regarding passport and visa; driver’s license; vehicle
registration; payment of custom duties and taxes. Incredibly, there are no
reciprocal rights and privileges given to the highest officials of the Philippine
armed forces or diplomats visiting the U.S.

       Third, the VFA virtually exempts American soldiers from the country’s
criminal prosecution and regulations of judicial process. Under Article V,
“Criminal Jurisdiction,” American soldiers who violate Philippine laws or
commit even a non-bailable crime are taken under the custody of the U.S.
Embassy or U.S. authorities. Next, the Philippine court which has jurisdiction
over a case involving an American soldier has only one year to finish
proceedings. Beyond that, the U.S. is not compelled to present the accused to
the court and has the right to take him out of the Philippines.

        Fourth, under Article VI, “Claims,” both countries voluntarily waive their
right to asking for damages caused by combat and non-combat operations
under the VFA in any part of the Philippines. This is the rule despite the
danger to human lives and the environment posed by the use of live
ammunition and explosives in military exercises by the American soldiers.

         Fifth, there is no provision in the VFA restricting the U.S. military from
bringing in nuclear arms despite the strict constraint in the 1987 Philippine
Constitution. 90 Adding insult to injury is the fact that the VFA mentions only a
“certificate against quarantinable diseases.” But quarantine inspection is
authorized only to the U.S. military commander who also issues certificates
even if he is considered a “visitor” entering the Philippines.

       The U.S. has also blatantly violated provisions requiring training
operations under the VFA to be conducted bilaterally. Teofisto Guingona, who
was Vice-President and secretary of foreign affairs, complained about the
unilateral operations of the U.S. conducted in Batanes, Clark and Cordillera. 91

recovery,” “medical, dental and humanitarian mission,” school infrastructure building, and other
90 In a de-classified document in 1997, the U.S. Pentagon admitted that during the
period of modern military bases in the Philippines (1947-1992) at least 60 nuclear
weapons were deployed in the Philippines from 1961 to 1977. Norris, Robert S.,
Arkin W.M. & Burr, William, (November-December 1999). “Where they were.”
Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Vol. 55, No. 06.
  Former DFA officials such as VFA Commission Director Elmer Cato and DFA Undersecretary and
VFA Commissioner Amado Valdez also reported such violations of VFA provisions. They were both
removed from the VFA Commission by the DFA. The VFA provides that all training exercises should
be bilateral, i.e., there should be both Filipino and American participants in joint exercises. Yet reports
told of U.S. unilateral training operations by U.S. troops at the former Clark airbase in Angeles City,
Pampanga; unilateral flights and pollution of Subic Bay off Olongapo City, site of the former U.S.
naval base. VFA officials also reported the absence of Filipinos on board a C-130 when it landed at
Indictment                                                                         86

        The Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (MLSA)

        The MDT and VFA were also invoked to justify the imposition of more
lop-sided agreements that compound the U.S. government’s infringement of
the Filipino people’s rights to national sovereignty and self-determination.

         The 5-year Mutual Logistics Support Agreement (MLSA), signed on
Nov. 21, 2002, paves the way for the U.S.’ “permanent-temporary” basing
facility and the entry or stockpiling of weapons of mass destruction, including
nuclear weapons. The MLSA covers the basic elements of an operational
base that include supplies (food, oil and ammunition), support services
(billeting, transportation, medical services, operations support and
construction, training services, repair and maintenance, storage and port
services), and open access to all ports and military facilities nationwide. This
makes the whole Philippine archipelago an operational base for the U.S.
forces and as a staging area for U.S. unilateral interventionist actions in Asia
Pacific and other parts of the world. 92

        In another executive agreement, the Non-Surrender Agreement of
2003, the Philippine government is under obligation to not surrender U.S.
military or civilian personnel operating in the Philippines to the International
Criminal Court (ICC) or any international tribunal unless it is established by
the UN Security Council, without the express consent of the U.S.
government. 93 The personnel involved in this agreement are those accused of
committing genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity. Apparently,
Philippine military and civilian personnel who are committing similar acts are
also protected by the U.S. government under the American Service Members’
Protection Act (ASPA) passed by the U.S. Congress in 2002. The Act
prohibits the ICC from exercising jurisdiction over not only U.S. officials and
military persons but also “covered allied persons” who include, according to its
Section 2013, those from “major non-NATO ally…for so long as that
government is not a party to the ICC…” 94

Clark in April 2001 and only Americans were conducting parachute jump training. In January 2002, a
U.S. Air Force cargo plane on a flying mission had no Filipino pilot or airman on board. Several U.S.
airplanes were also sighted during war exercises in “no fly zones” including the upland areas of
Kalinga-Apayao, Sierra Madre and Caraballo mountains in northern Luzon. ( Dec. 7-13,
   “Philippine Country Report” for the Philippines Reader on U.S. Bases, Atty. Cora Fabros of the
Nuclear-Free Philippines Coalition (NFPC), 2004.
   The secret Non-Surrender Agreement (or bilateral immunity agreement) signed on May 13, 2003
was just an exchange of notes between U.S. Ambassador to Manila Francis Ricciardone and then
Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Blas Ople. The U.S., as of 2003, has secured similar immunity
guarantees from 43 other countries prompting the Financial Times, in a June 12, 2003 editorial, to
describe it as “judicial imperialism.”
   Magallona, Merlin M., “Some comments on the Non-Surrender Agreement between the Philippines
and the United States,” The World Bulletin, Vol. 20, January-June 2003, University of the Philippines
Law Center.
Indictment                                                                         87

      The Non-Surrender Agreement – actually, a mere exchange of notes
between the U.S. ambassador and the Philippine foreign secretary - was a
precondition to making the Philippines a Major Non-NATO Ally (MNNA) which
was proclaimed by U.S. President Bush the same year. The MNNA waived
the prohibition of U.S. military assistance to the Philippines provided the
Arroyo government honored the Non-Surrender Agreement.

       The Non-Surrender Agreement is contrary to the Rome Statute of 1998
establishing the ICC, particularly Article 9 which seeks cooperation from UN
members. The contention of the bilateral agreement that U.S. soldiers are
above international law is not acceptable under the Charter of the UN. In fact,
many countries in Europe consider that bilateral agreements on immunity to
U.S. soldiers effectively make them “free” to commit international crimes.
Furthermore, the Non-Surrender Agreement is also of dubious legitimacy
because it derogates on long-standing obligations of the Philippines that are
embodied in international law norms of jus cogens character. 95

        The system of security agreements, regional organizations that justify
the U.S.-designed “counter terrorism” agenda, and the Arroyo administration’s
continuing subservience to the U.S. have also given the U.S. government,
particularly through its Pacific Command (PACOM), an extensive strategic
and tactical command advantage over the Armed Forces of the Philippines
(AFP), widely believed to be America’s surrogate army in the country
particularly in counter-insurgency. 96 This power is exercised through the
following security instruments, some of them formed only in recent years: the
Cold War-vintage Joint U.S. Military Advisory Group (JUSMAG); the Defense
Policy Board (DPB); a Joint Defense Assessment (JDA); and the Security
Engagement Board (SEB). The U.S.-Philippine DPB was created as “a new
bilateral defense consultative mechanism” in November 2001. Drawn up by
the U.S. PACOM and the U.S. DoD and concluded in 2003, the JDA identified
10 key areas of U.S. policy intervention such as the critical security areas of
planning, training, doctrines development and logistics procurement. JDA is
being implemented by the U.S. military under cover of “modernization
assistance” through the Philippine Defense Reform (PDR). Formed in 2006,
the SEB covers “non-traditional security concerns beyond the mandate of the
1951 MDT, including terrorism, transnational crimes, maritime security and
safety, and natural and man-made disasters. 97 Aside from the series of
Balikatan (shoulder-to-shoulder) U.S.-Philippines joint war exercises where up
to thousands of troops from both sides participate in one exercise, the U.S.
government conducts at least 10 more military and police trainings for
Philippine security forces. In particular, the U.S. International Military
Education and Training (IMET) program trains AFP special forces in anti-

   Art. 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of the Treaties, of which the Philippines is a party,
provides that any treaty including an executive agreement in conflict with a peremptory norm of
general international law at the time of its conclusion is void. (Magallona, “Some Comments…)
   The Commander-in-Chief of the PACOM (CINCPACOM) is considered America’s viceroy in the
region and therefore commands considerable influence on governments in the region.
   Africa, Sonny. “U.S. Imperialism in Southeast Asia and ASEAN,” Institute of Political Economy
Journals (Dec. 2006). Quezon City, Philippines: Institute of Political Economy.
Indictment                                                                         88

terrorism and counter-insurgency and assists U.S. goals of “access and
influence within the AFP and Philippine government more broadly.” 98

        All these structures and programs strengthen the U.S. hand over the
AFP, the police and paramilitary forces to make them more compliant with
America’s military objectives in the Philippines and in the region as a whole,
supportive of a repressive government and reliable in suppressing the
national and democratic aspirations of the Filipino people. Indeed, according
to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), U.S. military aid and
training programs held in the Philippines “are generally consistent with the
National Security Strategy of the United States.” 99

        In return for the Arroyo government’s support to the MDT, VFA and
other security impositions by the U.S., along with its support to U.S. President
George W. Bush’s “war against terrorism,” the U.S. government has
increased military aid to the Philippines by 1,111 percent. 100 The military aid in
the form of grants and loans has been used by the Arroyo government for its
counter-insurgency program leading to the escalation of human rights
violations and crimes against humanity 101 , even as parts of the military
assistance were also funneled to buy more weapons of mass destruction from
U.S. arms manufacturers. 102 The increase of U.S. military aid to the Philippine
government including its military modernization program is also based on the
Major Non-NATO Ally Agreement (MNNA) which is accorded to governments
that have shown unrelenting support to the U.S.’ wars of aggression contrary
to the Filipino people’s rights to national sovereignty and self-determination.

       Likewise, the system of onerous and lop-sided security arrangements
imposed upon the Filipino people serves to strengthen U.S. domination of the
Philippines under the neo-colonial relationship that was established after the
second world war. 103 It props up a puppet government even if U.S. support
has made it more repressive vis-a-vis the Filipino people.

   Source: U.S. Military Aid in East Asia and Pacific, 2006-2007. IMET has been considered “highly
successful in the Philippines.” The AFP chief of staff, all three service chiefs, and the Marine Corps
command are graduates of IMET. IMET graduates who occupy top AFP positions are said to have
promoted close U.S.-AFP military relations.
   U.S. GAO, “Report to Congressional Committees, July 2005.”
    Since 2001, the Arroyo government has received some $310 million in military aid making it the
largest recipient of U.S. military assistance in Southeast Asia. Africa, Sonny, “U.S. imperialism in
Southeast Asia and ASEAN,” Dec. 2006.
    The Philippine Aidwatch Network warned that increased U.S. military aid and development
assistance focusing in conflict areas may only be used by the AFP to intensify its attack not only
against the NPA guerillas but against unarmed civilians especially leaders and members of legal
organizations. (“U.S. aid militarization and Arroyo’s policy of repression,” Ibon Features in A New
Wave of State Terror in the Philippines, 2005. Quezon City, Philippines: Ibon Foundation, Inc.
    Weapons have also been flowing in. The U.S. delivered $67.6 million in military equipment to the
Philippines between 2001-2003. Between 2001 and 2005, the Philippines also received $145.8 million
in Foreign Military Financing and another $11.5 million in military training aid, for a total of more than
$157.3 million. In 2005, the Arroyo government was slated to receive $20 million in FMF and another
$2.9 million in IMET for 2006. (Source: Arms Trade Resource Center / World Policy Institute)
    The neo-colonial relationship was structured by a set of onerous economic and military treaties
imposed on the Filipino people upon the “granting” of independence on July 4, 1946. The retention of
the Philippines as a neo-colonial adjunct of the U.S. is amplified in the Policy Planning Staff (PPS)/23
Indictment                                                                         89

       In many other respects, the system of security arrangements violates
the people’s right to an independent foreign policy that allows the country to
interact with its neighbors peacefully and non-threateningly and to establish
relationship with them that is friendly, mutually beneficial and cooperative and
upholds the sovereign rights of peoples of other countries.

       The fact also that Mrs. Arroyo’s legitimacy as President, 104 especially
following the fraudulent May 2004 elections, remains questionable with
majority of Filipinos agreeing that she should be removed from office, all the
more gives her no constitutional authority to either enter into agreements with
the U.S. or to continue honoring them. Correspondingly, the U.S. government
has no right to deal with a President who is considered illegitimate especially
on security agreements that are imposed upon the Filipino people and which
violate their rights to national sovereignty and self-determination. 105

        On the other hand, the Bush government should be held culpable for
violating U.S. laws that restrict the provision of military aid to foreign
governments whose security forces are found to have committed gross
violations of human rights. The U.S. government’s own Government
Accountability Office (GAO), citing the U.S. State Department’s 2004 Country
Reports on Human Rights Practices, confirmed that elements of the Philippine
government’s security forces “were responsible for arbitrary, unlawful and, in
some cases, extrajudicial killings, disappearances, and torture, and arbitrary
arrest and detention.” 106

Linkage of U.S. security policy and the all-out war policy
of the Arroyo regime

       As were her predecessors, President Macapagal-Arroyo is indebted to
the support of the U.S. government and ever subservient to U.S. economic
and political impositions of U.S. multilateral institutions IMF-World Bank and
the World Trade Organization (WTO). As such, she gives all-out support for
the U.S. government’s security policy not only for the Philippines but in the
region as a whole.

       The security policy of the U.S., as articulated by the Bush
administration in various doctrines, security reviews and strategies is to
“secure” the region from “regional instability” arising from “terrorist threats” as
well as “threats” posed by China as a rising military power, by North Korea

memorandum of the U.S. State Department of 1948 which seeks the U.S. control of the Philippines as a
“military bulwark” requiring that all subsequent Presidents of the Philippines should remain “friendly”
to the U.S. This strategic policy on the Philippines would be reiterated in a series of secret directives
spanning governments until at least that of Corazon Aquino. Whatever specific policy directives came
after that period remain unavailable to researchers.
    Tuazon, Bobby (ed.) 2006. Fraud: Gloria M. Arroyo and the May 2004 elections. Philippines:
Policy Study, Publication and Advocacy, Cemter for People Empowerment in Governance (CenPEG).
    This is definitively in violation of the Algiers Declaration. The Universal Declaration of Human
Rights provides that “the will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.
    U.S. GAO Report to congressional committees, July 2005.
Indictment                                                                         90

and national liberation struggles. 107 Underlying such security policy is the U.S.
objective to ensure its global hegemony, economically and militarily. Thus, the
security policy calls for launching military operations particularly against
“terrorist cells” in the Philippines’ southern provinces (as well as in Indonesia
and other countries). Inevitably, for the Philippines, this called for
strengthening its bilateral security agreements with the Arroyo government,
drawing up a five-year program of war exercises which is renewable, and
special operations trainings, support for intelligence and surveillance
operations, and other forms of military assistance.

       All these happened particularly after Mrs. Arroyo became the first head
of state in Asia Pacific to express support for Bush’s “war against terrorism” in
the aftermath of 9/11. Her declaration of support paved the way for Bush’s
declaring the Philippines and the rest of Southeast Asia as the “second front”
in the war against terrorism thus hastening the entry of U.S. troops particularly
in southern Philippines followed by a series of military arrangements and
operations as aforementioned. 108

       Even before the U.S. could revive its strong military presence in the
Philippines, it had as early as the aftermath of the dismantling of its military
bases in 1992, maneuvered through secret talks with then President Fidel V.
Ramos to reinstall its military facilities in the country. In 2000, a U.S. think
tank funded by the U.S. Air Force, Rand Corporation, proposed to the
Pentagon that “…access to the Philippines and Vietnam would help establish
air superiority over the sealanes of the South China Sea.” Zalmay Khalilzad,
who later became the U.S. envoy to Afghanistan, advocated “a robust security
assistance program to allies in the region particularly the Philippines. Angel
Rabasa, another Rand senior policy analyst, called the Philippines “a frontline
state in the war of terrorism.” 109 The U.S. considers the Philippines as a key
security ally along with Japan, South Korea, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand and

      To justify the U.S. war of aggression in the Philippines, both the Bush
administration and its ally, Arroyo, inflated reports about the alleged links of
the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG) to al Qaeda and, much later, to Jemaah

    U.S. national security policy justifies the use and expansion of military forces including in Asia
Pacific to secure America’s access to world resources, its trade and investments as well as strategic
commercial sea routes. U.S. military projection also aims to prevent certain countries from challenging
its armed supremacy as well as threatening other countries that dare oppose U.S. imperialism and
    Truth is, even before 9/11, the Philippines, along with Iraq, Afghanistan and more than 50 other
countries had been in the CIA list of targets of U.S. military intervention under its emerging doctrine of
    Edberto Villegas, Bobby Tuazon, et al, Unmasking the War on Terror, Nov. 2002, Philippines.
Educated perceptions about the choice of Mindanao as the priority entry point for U.S. forces and
facilities especially after 9/11 point to its strategic importance: Not only is it closest to the Muslim-
populated Indonesia and Malaysia where major commercial sea routes are also located, it is also a
“confirmed oil country.” Discoveries of oil and gas in Palawan and Cotabato reinforced the satellite
findings of the National Aeronautics and Space Agency (NASA) that the largest deposits of oil and gas
in Asia could lie in the area covered by Mindanao, Sulu and Palawan (Minsupala). Liguasan Marsh
alone has reportedly 1.3 trillion cubic feet of proven natural gas reserves.
Indictment                                                                         91

Islamiyah (JI), when in fact Arroyo’s own AFP generals had reported months
before 9/11 that the ASG, a mere bandit or kidnap-for-ransom gang, had been
“neutralized” and reduced to an insignificant few. Apparently, this “counter-
terrorist” security objective was only being used as a pretext for a priority
security target in the Philippines: the Communist Party of the Philippines
(CPP), its armed component, the New People’s Army (NPA) and their alleged
legal “front organizations.”

        Since the Marcos years, the U.S. government has tagged the CPP-
NPA as a security threat not only because of its strong anti-imperialist
advocacy but also because its political victory would be inimical to America’s
military presence in the Philippines and the region as a whole. 9/11 provided
the opportunity for increased military intervention in the country that had
earlier been revived with the signing of the VFA in 1998 – long before
“terrorism, Al Qaeda and Abu Sayyaf” became buzzwords in the Philippines.
“Counter-terrorism” particularly the anti-Abu Sayyaf operation provided the
excuse for increased military assistance – an objective that readily secured
the budgetary support of the U.S. Congress – to a client government together
with all the military doctrines, equipment, trainings and combat support
needed for counter-insurgency.

        Originally conceived as a military blueprint against the ASG, Oplan
Bantay Laya I (OBL or Operation Plan Freedom Watch), was adopted by the
Arroyo government in 2002 as an “end game strategy” against what its
President claimed as the country’s No. 1 “state enemy” – the CPP, NDFP and
NPA and their alleged front organizations all of whom, by that time, had been
tagged as “terrorist organizations.” In early 2006, Mrs. Arroyo’s Cabinet
Oversight Committee on Internal Security (COC-IS) refined OBL 110 as the
Enhanced National Internal Security Plan (or NISP). In the campaign against
the armed Left, OBL or the internal security plan was to be prioritized in
regions where there is strong NPA presence combining combat, intelligence
and civil-military operations. But OBL also stresses the “neutralization” of the
communists’ “sectoral front organizations” and their “most vulnerable
infrastructures” to make it effective. By experience and as understood by
rights watchdogs and activist groups, to “neutralize” translates into physical
elimination or political assassination, 111 which is part of the unconventional
warfare doctrine and practice of the U.S. and Philippine military.

        Historically, the U.S. has been involved in counter-insurgency in the
Philippines – either as the architect or through military aid - since the Huk
rebellion (1950s, which also involved CIA operations); in the series of
suppression campaigns under Marcos (1970s-1986); Corazon Aquino (“total
war” and CIA-sponsored low-intensity conflict, 1986-1992) 112 ; Fidel V. Ramos
   OBL I has been extended in January 2007 as OBL II for another five years.
   Urgency was prescribed for OBL’s implementation when Mrs. Arroyo declared that the dismantling
of the backbone of the armed Left be fast-tracked from 10 years to two years.
112 The adoption of the Aquino military’s U.S.-sponsored Low Intensity Conflict (LIC)
coincided with the frequent visits of CIA officials including Gen. John Singlaub. A
report by the independent news service, Philippine News and Features (PNF) on April
6, 1987 revealed that “a CIA branch of 70 agents was recently established in
Indictment                                                                         92

(VFA, 1992-1998); and Joseph E. Estrada (total war in Mindanao, 1998-
January 2001). All previous counter-insurgency campaigns and the present
OBL are based on US counter-insurgency doctrine. More so now under the
current regime of U.S. armed intervention and aggression. These doctrines
emphasize the use of psychological or unconventional warfare that essentially
justifies the use of terror including political assassination, abductions and
massacres against “enemies” of the state.

        U.S. intervention in the conduct of counter-insurgency in the
Philippines has been carried out through military commands, bilateral
agencies and programs: the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) which includes
the Philippines as a key country 113 in its “area of responsibility”; the Joint U.S.
Military Advisory Group (JUSMAG), which has traditionally been involved
principally in the planning and implementation of U.S.-aided counter-
insurgency operations in the Philippines; the Joint Defense Assessment (JDA)
and the 5-year Philippine Defense Reform (PDR) supervised by PACOM;
Defense Policy Board (of both the DoD and DND); Security Engagement
Board (SEB); and the Philippine Army Special Operations Command
(PASOCOM, which is composed of seven special forces battalions and two
scout ranger battalions). These provide the mechanisms for U.S. strategic and
tactical influence over the AFP and other state forces involved in counter-
insurgency. Ultimately, they also ensure that the Arroyo administration’s
counter-insurgency instruments serve the U.S. government’s security
objectives in the Philippines and in the region.

“Terrorist listing” of the CPP, NPA and NDFP chief political consultant
and subverting the peace process

       In collusion with the Arroyo government, the Bush administration
reinstated the CPP-NPA and Prof. Jose Maria Sison, Chief Political
Consultant of the NDFP peace panel, in the State Department’s “foreign

Mindanao.” There were also, according to the report, frequent visits of USIS official
William Parker to Lt. Col. Franco Calida, who masterminded the formation of anti-
communist vigilantes in Davao City in Mindanao. President Reagan was also
reported to have authorized the release of $10 million and the deployment of 12 new
CIA agents to conduct covert operations in the Philippines. The book, Pumipiglas 3:
Torment and Struggle after Marcos, also reveals that Reagan officials pressed the
Aquino administration to take a hard-line counter-insurgency program, with a
ranking Reagan official reiterating Washington’s view that “military force is the only
way to defeat the NPA.” About $64 million military aid was given to the AFP for the
counter-insurgency program. During the Aquino presidency, there were about 250
anti-communist vigilante groups with some of them notorious for beheading and
mutilating the bodies of their victims. (Carranza-Paraan, Rowena, and Eileen C.
Legaspi, et al, Bobby Tuazon, ed.; Pumipiglas 3: Torment and Struggle after Marcos:
A report on human rights trends in the Philippines under Aquino, March 1986-June
1992. 1993. Quezon City, Philippines: Task Force Detainees of the Philippines)
    Originating from national security directives issued over the past 50 years, the Philippines remains a
key security ally of the U.S. in the Asia Pacific region. In this situation, the Philippines serves as a
strategic outpost in America’s military projection in the region, in ensuring U.S. control of strategic
trade routes, in the military encirclement of China and similar other military objectives in the Korean
Peninsula and elsewhere.
Indictment                                                                         93

terrorist organizations” (FTO) list on Aug. 9, 2002, with the Council of the
European Union and, on Oct.22 the same year, the Dutch government
following suit by including Professor Sison in their “terrorist lists.”

         The U.S. action made it illegal for anyone in the U.S. to "provide
material support or resources" to the groups; required U.S. financial
institutions to block any assets held by them; and prohibited representatives
or members of those groups from entering the U.S. or made them subject to
deportation from the U.S. Several days later, the U.S. Treasury Department
listed the CPP, NPA, and Sison among the organizations and individuals that
are targets for the freezing of assets by financial institutions.

        At the same time, the Arroyo government peace panel pressed the
NDFP side to accept a fast-track formula for the talks, which was essentially a
blueprint for surrender. Meantime, the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines (GRP) refused to accede to the demand of the NDFP to work for
the removal of the CPP-NPA and Professor Sison from the “terrorist lists” in
accordance with agreements already signed by both parties and to uphold the
principle of non-interference by a foreign country The GRP tactics apparently
provoked the NDFP to protest leading eventually to the collapse of the peace
talks in Oslo, Norway. In response, the GRP unilaterally suspended the Joint
Agreement on Security and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG) placing all NDFP
personnel vulnerable to military attacks.

        The “terrorist listing” and suspension of JASIG fitted into the U.S.
position of not negotiating with the Left and its preference for keeping the
military ante as a means of forcing the NDFP to surrender. Both the U.S. and
GRP had anticipated the collapse of the peace talks paving the way for the
escalation not only of counter-insurgency operations but also the political
assassinations and enforced disappearances of suspected Leftist activists.
Former government chief peace negotiator, Silvestre Bello III, recently spilled
the beans somewhat when he said that the current internal security plan aims
to force the NDFP back to the negotiating table where the GRP panel can talk
“from a position of strength.”

       Clearly, the tagging of Professor Sison and the CPP-NPA as “terrorist”
was political blackmail and was bereft of any legal justification under
international law that protects the rights of political refugees as well as those
of revolutionary organizations. Their designation in the “foreign terrorist lists”
of these governments was designed to blackmail the revolutionary
organizations and force them to surrender 114 , deprive them of international
solidarity support and rob them of their credibility and recognition as a national

   Joseph Mussomeli, then the U.S. charge d’affaires, said the FTO tag will be removed only after a
final peace agreement between the GRP and NDFP was reached. “The NPA has been on the FTO list
for several years now…If they reach a peace accord then they can get off the list. The FTO is really an
incentive to them to start talking and give up terrorism.” Philippine Foreign Affairs Secretary Blas
Ople also said that only when the CPP-NPA give up their armed struggle would the “terrorist” tag be
removed. Sometime mid-2006, Silvestre Bello III, former GRP chief negotiator, similarly confirmed
that the government’s counter-insurgency operations are aimed at forcing the NDFP to go back to the
negotiating table when the GRP shall be talking “from a position of strength.”
Indictment                                                                         94

liberation movement or entities fighting for freedom and independence for the
Filipino people by vilifying them as “terrorists.”

         The struggles of these revolutionary organizations, as the PPT found in
its first session on the Philippines in 1980, are legitimate under international
law. 115 But this right to armed resistance is now downgraded by the EU
Council, the Dutch and U.S. governments to a criminal act. The “FTO” tag on
the CPP-NPA also violates agreements signed by both the GRP and NDFP
during peace negotiations reiterating the Filipino people’s sovereign right to
resolve the armed conflict and non-interference by any foreign government.

        In particular, the Council of the European Union and the Dutch
government violated the rights of Professor Sison, a political refugee living in
The Netherlands. By freezing his bank accounts, the Dutch government cut
off his small allowance that he had been receiving for health insurance,
housing and other basic necessities. Both the EU Council and the Dutch
government also violated his rights by: 1) not initiating any investigation even
after the Philippine secretary of justice in 1998 cleared Sison of any
involvement in any criminal activity in the Philippines; 2) the supposed
grounds for including Professor Sison in the “terrorist” list were derived from
secret intelligence dossiers in 1993 which a Dutch judge described as “stale”
and, moreover, the source itself – the Dutch intelligence agency (BVD) –
could not qualify as a “competent judicial authority”; 3) Prof. Sison’s bank
accounts could not be proven as being linked to or used for “terrorist
activities” precisely because not only are these constituted small amounts
intended for his essential living expenses but also come from the Dutch social
welfare agency.

        The EU Council also grossly violated Professor Sison’s rights to
examine the basis or evidence that became the grounds for his inclusion as a
“terrorist” and to a fair trial and to defense.

        The Amnesty International (AI), in August 2006, also said that Sison’s
inclusion in the “terrorist” list “illustrates how the decision and procedure to
include an individual in the list of terrorist organizations can violate elementary
basic rights, including the right to presumption of innocence, the right to due
process, and the right to defense.” AI also agreed with the analysis of the EU
Network of Independent Experts, that the asset-freezing provisions of the
“terrorist” blacklist affect the presumption of innocence because it prejudges
the guilt of persons who have not been convicted of a crime. The fundamental
rights of persons include the right to be protected against damage to honor

   The revolutionary Left, i.e., the CPP-NPA-NDFP, is waging a war of national liberation against
U.S. imperialism and a democratic revolution against feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism. Based on
their program, the revolutionary struggle seeks to dismantle the semi-colonial, semi-feudal structure of
the Philippine society and work for national industrialization and genuine agrarian reform toward
socialism. But even as it wages armed struggle, the CPP-NPA-NDFP pledged to commit themselves to
uphold the Comprehensive Agreement on Human Rights and Respect for International Humanitarian
Law (CARHRIHL) signed by the NDFP and Philippine government in 1998. The NDFP stands on
record as accusing the Philippine government of violating provisions of the agreement particularly
under its U.S.-initiated and support “war on terror.”
Indictment                                                                         95

and reputation and the right to be presumed innocent until guilt is
established. 116

       In the case of the CPP-NPA’s designation in the U.S. Department of
State’s FTO list, the basis was entirely on hearsay and there was no legal
opportunity for counter-evidence by the revolutionary organizations
affected. 117 There is no international law that will support the U.S. state
department’s action considering, among others, that the United Nations has
no universally-agreed upon definition of the “international crime” of “terrorism,”
specifically on whether to include national liberations movements within the
scope of the term “terrorism.”

        In fact, the Supreme Court of the Philippines 118 ruled on May 3, 2006
that there are no “acts of terrorism” in the Philippine criminal justice system,
thus belying the false presumption of foreign governments as well as the
Arroyo government. The SC ruling repudiates in unmistakable terms the
claims of the Arroyo administration that the CPP, NPA and NDFP Chief
Political Consultant Professor Sison “committed and are liable for the crime of
‘terrorism’ under Philippine laws. 119

        It is the U.S. government that has waged terrorist acts against the
Filipino people and propped up an illegitimate President in order to conduct a
systematic and nationwide political persecution of activists and progressive
critics resulting in the gross and systematic violations of human rights. In so
doing, the U.S.-backed Arroyo government likewise qualifies as a prime
example of state terrorism. The collusion between Bush and Arroyo in this
regard serves no purpose other than to prolong and exacerbate the armed
conflict and the suffering of the Filipino people in violation of joint agreements
signed between the GRP and NDFP calling for the comprehensive solution of
the roots of the armed conflict toward a just and lasting peace.

Crimes in U.S. military intervention

       In the name of the “war against terrorism” which was launched by U.S.
President Bush and Mrs. Arroyo in the Philippines including on the Mindanao
island, U.S. forces have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity.

       The crimes were perpetrated during combat operations against both
the ASG and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF), in the course of war
exercises and special training operations and other activities. To the extent

    “Amnesty International defends the basic rights of Prof. Jose Maria Sison in ‘terrorist’ blacklist
case,” DEFEND Committee, Aug. 8, 2006.
    See the case of the People’s Mojahedin Organization of Iran vs Albright, and Liberation of Tigers of
Tamil Eelam vs Department of State, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Colombia, June 25,
    Kilusang Mayo Uno et al vs President of the Philippines Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo et al, GR No.
171483 involving Presidential Proclamation 1017, SC decision of May 3, 2006.
    UN ad Litem Judge Romeo T. Capulong, as cited in “Philippine Supreme Court belies basis of
‘terrorist’ listing of Prof. Sison by the Council of European Union,” DEFEND Committee, May 26,
Indictment                                                                         96

that the U.S. government has rejected demands to accept accountability for
previous and continuing crimes – such as the toxic contamination in its former
military bases affecting large communities – such cases are also mentioned.
The cases cited here do not include a long list of crimes committed under the
U.S.-backed counter-insurgency operations throughout the Philippines with
most of the victims being non-combatants, civilians and suspected Leftist
activists and supporters.

        Displacement of whole communities

        Hundreds of thousands of people have been displaced particularly in
southern Philippines (Mindanao) during joint U.S.-Philippine military
operations against the ASG. In January-August 2002, about 90,000 villagers
were uprooted many of them in western Mindanao (Maguindanao province),
on the islands of Jolo and Basilan, and Lanao del Sur. Forty-five thousand of
them were in the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao or ARMM. The
forcible evacuations and other forms of displacement were often a result of
indiscriminate bombardments resulting in killings and injuries and the
destruction of property. Reports also said that as military operations were
ongoing, government agencies provided no adequate relief and rehabilitation
measures, evacuation centers had poor conditions, with epidemics of
diseases as well as starvation becoming widespread. 120

       From January to September 2005, a total of 158,375 persons were
reportedly displaced by armed hostilities between the U.S.-aided AFP troops
and Moro guerillas and suspected ASG bandit extremists with the worst
incidents taking place on Sulu island province where there were active U.S.-
supported military and police operations against the ASG and similar
operations against the MNLF resulting in the displacement of more than
85,000 people in early February alone. 121 Previous U.S.-aided operations
against the ASG in a Sultan Kudarat town in December 2004-January 2005
also resulted in the displacement of 8,866 people. From January to August
2002, 90,000 people were displaced by joint military operations mounted by
the AFP and U.S. troops, many of them in Maguindanao (western Mindanao)
and on the islands of Jolo and Basilan. 122

        Elsewhere, in Central Luzon, in 2002 Balikatan 02-2 U.S.-Philippine
war exercises led to the militarization of 27 out of 29 Aeta communities. In
militarized villages, martial law-style rules were imposed such as curfew,
illegal house searches, military checkpoints and constant interrogation of
residents. There was a virtual food blockade as the purchase of food was

    “Displacements Due to War on Terror,” Global IDP Project, Nov. 25, 2002; citing reports from the
Ecumenical Commission for Displaced Families and Communities (ECDFC), AI, Department of Social
Welfare and Development (DSWD), Oxfam, United Nations Resident Coordinator (UNRC), UNDP,
U.S. Committee for Refugees (USCR), U.S. Department of State.
    “Profile of Internal Displacement: Philippines,” Global IDP Database of the Norwegian Refugee
Council, Sept. 3, 2005, citing reports by the Philippine government’s Disaster Monitoring Center
(DROMIC) and media accounts.
    “More Filipinos displaced in war on terror,” Global IDP Database of the Norwegian Refugee
Council, Nov. 25, 2002, citing reports by ECDFC and other accounts.
Indictment                                                                         97

restricted to the minimum with military claiming that food items were being
brought to NPA guerillas in the area. 123

       Overall, from 1972, when military rule was declared by Marcos, until
2005 the U.S.-backed counter-insurgency operations have led to the
displacement of 8.7 million people or about 10 percent of the country’s
present population of 87 million. About one-third of the 3.030 million internally-
displaced persons (IDPs) or internal refugees of the armed conflict from 1986
to 2005 were displaced during the Arroyo administration (2001-2005). 124

         Killings, abductions, and illegal arrests

       Attacks by the Philippine military with the support of U.S. forces on
villages suspected of coddling ASG members were perpetrated between
2002-2005 resulting in the killing of civilians as well as abductions and illegal
arrests. In some incidents, U.S. forces were involved in direct combat or
provided military support to Philippine soldiers. 125 This was confirmed by
former U.S. Defense Undersecretary Paul Wolfowitz in 2002 when he said
that U.S. military aid to the Philippines “includes direct support of military
operations (against the Abu Sayyaf).” The involvement of U.S. troops in local
combat operations have long been confirmed by media reports and interviews
with local residents who said they had seen fully-armed U.S. troops
accompanying Filipino soldiers in combat operations against the Abu Sayaff.

       Contingents of U.S. Special Operations Forces (SOFs) have been
stationed in southern Philippines since 2002 and conduct unconventional
warfare against suspect “terrorist” groups “under the guise of an exercise,”
according to Col. David Maxwell, the first commander of the Joint Special
Operations Task Force-Philippines (JSOTF-P). U.S. SOFs have “intentionally
ventured       into       known         Abu        Sayyaf       territory.” 126

Some specific cases

    Proceedings of the National Workshop of Indigenous Peoples on Human Rights (Feb. 24, 2004).
Quezon City: Ateneo de Manila University.
    2005 Report of the Citizens’ Disaster Response Center (CDRC), citing figures from the
International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and its own field reports. The CDRC report does not
include the estimated number of IDPs for 1985.
    Joint exercises started in 2000 and from the outset there were incidents. In March 2000, there were
joint naval exercises; three U.S. sailors were arrested and charged with bashing up a Cebu City taxi
driver in a dispute over his fare. The case was dropped after the U.S. paid the cabbie $5,000. A more
deadly situation occurred in August 2000, also on Cebu. Navy SEALs (Sea, Air, Land Special Forces)
and their Philippine Navy counterparts held a secret exercise (Flash Piston exercise) in the former Atlas
Mine at Toledo, in the island’s interior. They left an unexploded rocket-launched grenade behind while
they were swimming. Local kids found it, the thing blew up, killing two and injuring another. Charges
of homicide and injury were filed against 39 U.S. SEALs and Philippine Navy commandos (the U.S.
claimed immunity for its men). The parents of the dead boys were paid P1.5 million, with the
prosecutors asked to drop the charges.
    Herbert Docena, “U.S. troops’ unconventional presence,” Malaya, Jan. 15, 2007, citing Maxwell,
U.S. Army Combined Arms Center’s Military Review journal and the Center for Defense Information
(CDI, Washington, DC).
Indictment                                                                         98

         US troops engaged in combat operations
         and involved in shooting civilians

        Midnight of July 25, 2002, a U.S. soldier shot and wounded an
unarmed civilian, Buyong Buyong Isnijal, in a small village of Tuburan, a town
on Basilan island, southern Mindanao. The shooting happened during a raid
without warrant by a composite team of U.S. and Filipino soldiers on the home
of Isnijal. The wounded victim was taken by the military after the incident and
his family was not told about Isnijal’s whereabouts. The incident was also in
blatant violation of the spurious Terms of Reference of Balikatan joint war
exercises prohibiting U.S. forces from participating in combat operations on
Philippine territory. In many areas, the U.S. troops were given free rein to
play the role of military and police in local matters, bypassing the civilian
authorities. 127

       In a similar incident, Arsad Baharon, 25, was shot and wounded by
U.S. soldiers during a live fire exercise in Zamboanga City, southern
Philippines in 2004. According to a report, the U.S. military conceded that they
mistook Baharon for a cow. Baharon was received no medical aid from the
soldiers. 128

        Also in southern Mindanao in 2002, U.S. spy planes were spotted
circling overhead for hours, just before Philippine troops raided communities
and arrested residents without any warrants or charges. A U.S. spy plane
provided the information that led to the massacre of three unarmed fisherfolk
in Lantawan. The U.S. planes also dropped what appeared to be barrels of
toxic waste in the coastal waters of Basilan and the islands of Sulu. 129

       The ISM report also cited one witness who testified that her 11-year-old
child was abducted by Philippine soldiers and was later reported killed along
with three other alleged ASG members in what appeared to be a summary
execution. There were also chilling stories of women and minors harassed
and then arrested and thrown into prison on unsubstantiated charges with ho
medical care. At least one woman prisoner lost her unborn child.

       In July 2005, U.S. and Filipino forces launched a joint operation in
Mindanao in pursuit of the suspected leader of ASG, Khaddafy Janjalani. An
ASG spokesman said that U.S. forces were engaged in direct combat. In a
denial, a U.S. military official stated that U.S. forces were only supplying
communications and intelligence support but admitted that U.S. Army Special
Forces and Navy SEALs were working in the area with Filipino forces. U.S.

    “Against U.S. Armed Intervention in the Philippines,” Statement of the International Solidarity
Mission (ISM), July 24-31, 2002. Joint U.S.-Philippine operations in the area started in January 2002.
    Philippine Daily Inquirer, “Parents told: Keep kids from US troops,” Feb. 17, 2007. In the period of
the U.S. military bases in the Philippines, scores of civilians were shot dead by American soldiers
guarding their facilities or in live exercises, claiming in most cases that they mistook the victims for a
    ISM, July 24-31, 2002.
Indictment                                                                         99

Navy P3 Orion aircraft and unmanned aerial vehicles were also reportedly
involved in intelligence support for this operation; 130

         Rape by a US Marine and violation of Philippine jurisdiction
         and custody of the convict

       On Nov. 1, 2005, four U.S. Marines and a Filipino driver were involved
in the gang rape of a 22-year-old Filipina, identified by the court only as
“Nicole,” in a van inside the former U.S. naval base of Subic Bay in Olongapo
City, north of Manila.

       Complaint papers said that Marine Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith, 21, raped
the Filipina, while three fellow Marines cheered him on to the beat of loud
music. Also charged were Lance Cpl. Keith Silkwood, Lance Cpl. Dominic
Duplantis and Staff Sgt. Chad Carpentier. Invoking the VFA and against the
country’s Revised Penal Code, the U.S. Embassy in Manila took custody of
the four U.S. Marines while they were on trial. 131

         Smith was found guilty of rape and was sentenced to a 40-year
imprisonment by the Makati Regional Trial Court on Dec. 4, 2006. The three
other co-accused U.S. Marines were exonerated for lack of evidence and
were immediately whisked off back to the U.S. 132 While the decision was on
appeal, and upon instructions of the Philippine government, through its
Departments of Justice and Foreign Affairs, and the U.S. Embassy, Smith
was clandestinely spirited out of the Makati City Jail and brought back to the
U.S. Embassy midnight of Dec. 29, 2006, in violation of the country’s
sovereign right to exercise exclusive jurisdiction and custody of the convicted
rapist. 133

         Bombing incident involving a CIA operative

       A suspected CIA operative, Michael Terrence Meiring, 65, was
arrested by police on May 16, 2002 with explosives in his possession at the
Evergreen Hotel in Davao City, southern Philippines.

    Source: Arms Trade Resource Center / World Policy Institute.
    See GMA “The witnesses’ testimonies in gist” (June 22, 2006) Last accessed January 11,
    During the time of the U.S. military bases in the Philippines, particularly between 1983-1988 or in
just five years, many of the 108 reported rape cases committed by U.S. soldiers were dismissed due to
the absence of the accused – they were actually whisked back to the U.S. before they could even be
charged in court. (“U.S. Custody of 6 Marines Unconstitutional: Philippine Laws Prohibit their
Transfer Abroad,” Atty. Neri Javier Colmenares, Counsels for the Defense of Civil Liberties of
CODAL, Nov. 10, 2005.
    The transfer of custody to the U.S. Embassy in Manila was based on an agreement between Foreign
Secretary Alberto Romulo and U.S. Ambassador Kristie Kenney. The declaration of the agreement as
null and void has been sought by former Senate President Jovito Salongato and former Sen. Wigberto
Tanada a petition to the Supreme Court Jan. 19, 2007 which cited the agreement as creating a
“privileged class among the criminals.”
Indictment                                                                        100

An inadvertent blast caused by the explosives blew his legs off and severely
damaged his hotel room. American agents who identified themselves as being
from the U.S. National Security Agency and Federal Bureau of Investigation
barged into his room at the Davao Medical Mission Hospital, brusquely
prevented the city mayor and police from holding crime inquiries and flew him
back to the U.S. A few weeks after the explosion, a searing expose of
Meiring’s ties to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the Abu Sayyaf
was published in the Manila Times. In September the same year, Davao City
Prosecutor Raul Bendico announced the city’s findings on the Evergreen
Hotel blast and proclaimed Meiring a “terrorist.” 134 The case raised suspicions
that the CIA was involved in bombing incidents in Davao at that time and in
pinning the blame on “terrorists” to justify U.S. armed intervention in southern

The Meiring incident took place at the time when Col. David Fridovich headed
a “Special Operations” task force in Mindanao. Fridovich, now a major
general 135 , now heads the Special Operations Command, said to be the
military vanguard against terrorism under the U.S. Pacific Command

U.S. bases’ toxic contamination: Deaths, illnesses, injuries and
deformations, ecological destruction and destruction of livelihoods.

        The U.S. government continues to refuse to account for the deaths,
illnesses, injuries and deformation, ecological destruction and destruction of
livelihoods caused by its operation of at least 25 U.S. bases, camps and
installations 136 as well as military exercises held from 1898 – when U.S.
forces invaded and took control of the Philippines as a colony – until 1992, a
year after the rejection by the Philippine Senate of the proposed treaty for
bases renewal. 137

       Citing documents released by the U.S. Department of Defense, the
U.S. General Accounting Office and several other scientific findings, the
Philippine Senate, based on Committee Report No. 237 (submitted by the
upper chamber’s Committees on Foreign Relations, Health and Demography,
and Environment and Natural Resources) in 2000, 138 confirmed the

    Joel Garduce, “Shadowy Groups and Bloody Deceits of the War on Terrorism,” March 2-8, 2003,
Center for Anti-Imperialist Studies (CAIS), published by See also Carolyn O. Arguillas,
“The Meiring mystery: Affront to Philippine sovereignty” and “The extradition that never was” (May
30 - June 1, 2003), MindaNews; and The Philippine Star, “CIA whisks away Brit-Am blast victim; now
in U.S.” Edith Regalado July 9, 2002.
    Richard Halloran, “The ‘tip of the spear’ in the war on terror,” Last accessed Feb. 16, 2007.
    Philippine Insight, special issue, “Understanding intervention in their own words” (August 1989).
Philippines: Ecumenical Partnership for International Concerns.
    Treaty of Friendship, Cooperation, and Security Between the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines and the Government of the United States of America, signed between the two governments
on Aug. 27, 1991.
    Philippine Senate Committee Report No. 237, “On toxic contamination in the former U.S. bases in
the Philippines (2000).” The committee based its report on various documents, including: a) U.S. DoD,
“Potential restoration sites on board the U.S. facility, Subic Bay” (October 1992) by the U.S. Navy;
Indictment                                                                        101

substantial environmental contamination in the former U.S. bases particularly
in Subic Bay Naval Base in Olongapo City and Clark Field Air Base in
Angeles City, alleging likewise that the U.S. forces knowingly conducted
“hazardous activities, operations and improper waste management
practices…within the military bases.” The Senate also said that the
environmental damage caused in Subic and Clark “was substantial and had
serious adverse ecological, human health and economic implications for the
residents within the area and for the Philippines in general.” It also held that
the U.S. government has the “corresponding duty to repair and compensate
for such damage” and, if it refuses, for the Philippine chief executive to file a
case against the U.S. government before an international body, such as the
International Court of Justice, to demand repatriation and compensation for
toxic contamination.

       At the former Clark Air Base Command (CABCOM) in Mabalacat,
Pampanga, at least 100 residents, many of them children, died of various
ailments ranging from cancer, leukemia, heart failure, kidney disorder and
other ailments attributed to toxic contamination from 1995-1999 alone. At
least 500 other residents were feared awaiting the same fate as of 2001. 139

       Despite its admissions that the toxic contamination at the former U.S.
bases posed hazards to public health and the environment, the U.S.
government has, since 1993, refused to take heed on demands for clean-up,
repair and compensation with the Pentagon itself saying its government
imposes on host nations the costs and risks of cleaning up toxic sites
discovered after bases have been turned over to host countries. On June 24,
1999, U.S. Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Sherry Goodman also
maintained that the 1947 Military Bases Agreement (MBA), as amended, did
not require the U.S. to conduct any environmental restoration upon its
termination. On the other hand, the Philippine government, from Corazon
Aquino to the present President, has not actively pursued the case with the
U.S. government beyond issuing “requests” for assessment and investigation

“Underground storage tank inventory: Subic Bay, Philippines”; and “Environmental review of the
drawdown activities at Clark Air Base, Republic of the Philippines” by Col. John J. Allen (September
1991); b) U.S. General Accounting Office (National Security and International Affairs Division),
“Military bases closure: U.S. financial obligations in the Philippines” (Jan. 22, 1992); c) World Health
Organization (WHO), Mission Report, Subic Bay environmental risk assessment and investigation
program, May 9, 1993; d) “Environmental and health impact report on known and potentially-
contaminated sites at former U.S. military bases in the Philippines,” by Paul Bloom, PhD, Jorge
Emmanuel, PhD, et al, Aug. 13, 1994; e) “Environmental baseline study/soil and water baseline study”
on Clark by Weston International; f) “Environmental baseline study/environmental quality study” on
Subic, November 1996, by Woodward-Clyde International, commissioned by the Subic Bay
Metropolitan Authority; g) “Health for all survey” conducted around Clark Field Air Force Base, 1998,
by Canadian epidemiologist Dr. Rosalie Bertell; h) Philippines’ Department of Health, results of 32
well samples taken at Clark, 1995.
    Philippine Senate Committee Report No. 237 (2000). Also see Zelda Soriano, “America’s toxic
waste legacy” Special Report (March 30-April 15, 2001),; and the testimonies of
Armando Rivera and Mario de Leon, former base worker, “Health impact: Philippine experience,” U.S.
Military Bases and the Environment: A Time for Responsibility,” proceedings of international forum,
Nov. 23-26, 1996.
Indictment                                                                        102

of the toxic contamination. 140 On this basis alone, the Arroyo government
should be cited for its partiality in upholding U.S. interests at the expense of
the Filipino people’s national sovereignty and self-determination.

        Yet, the U.S. government is liable for the deaths, illnesses, injuries and
deformations, environmental damage and other ill effects wrought by the
operations of the U.S. bases – as well as by present military exercises and
operations that U.S. forces continue to conduct today – under both Philippine
laws and international law. 141 In January 2005, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of
Appeals in San Francisco, California was set to hear an appeal filed by
residents near Subic and Clark, together with the Filipino/American Coalition
for Environmental Solution (FACES) and Arc Ecology to compel the U.S.
military to conduct an assessment of contaminated areas near the U.S.
bases. 142

         Other crimes.

      Law Dean Amado Valdez, in his former capacity as director of the VFA
monitoring commission, reported U.S. troops violations of the VFA including a
drunk-driving accident involving U.S. soldiers in Zamboanga City. 143

        Wherever there are U.S. troops, there are reports of proliferation of
prostitution, child molestation, and displacement of indigenous Aeta

CIA creation of “Islamic terrorists” and anti-terrorist hysteria

        The Bush administration lied when it named the Abu Sayyaf as a
“terrorist group” in order to justify a “counter-terrorist” war particularly in
southern Philippines. The anti-terrorist hysteria that ensued was in turn
applied against the people’s democratic revolution, which has been waging an
armed struggle against imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism
since 1969, by subjecting it to vilification and criminalization. Even the legal

    In August 2000, the Philippine Task Force on the Bases Clean-Up (PTFBC) on behalf of the toxic
victims filed a class suit with the Regional Trial Courts of San Fernando, Pampanga and Olongapo
City. Instead of supporting the suit, then Philippine Foreign Secretary Domingo Siazon, Jr. warned the
complainants “they would have a hard time proving their case,” adding that Philippine courts have no
jurisdiction to compel the U.S. to answer the charges. Soriano, Zelda, “America’s toxic waste legacy”
Special Report (March 30-April 15, 2001),
    Including, for instance, Republic Act No. 6969, or the “Toxic Substances and Hazardous Nuclear
Wastes Control Act”; the 1972 Stockholm Declaration on the Human Environment, particularly
Principle 21 (“States have, in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and the principles of
international law, the sovereign right to exploit their own natural resources pursuant to their own
environmental policies, and the responsibility to ensure that activities within their jurisdiction or
control do not cause damage to the environment of other States or of areas beyond the limits of national
jurisdiction.”); and Principle 2 of the Declaration of the UN Conference on Environment and
Development or the Rio Declaration.
    See complaint filed before the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, San Jose
Division, filed by Atty. Scott J. Allen, Dec. 3, 2002.
143, Dec. 7-13, 2003.
Indictment                                                                        103

opposition against U.S. military aggression and its struggle for comprehensive
social, economic and political reform has been threatened with brutal political
persecution and “legal” actions.

       In the same way that al Qaeda, the terrorist network alleged by the
U.S. government of being behind the 9/11 bombings and similar incidents
across the world, is said to be a CIA creation, the Abu Sayyaf Group (ASG)
also traces its roots to CIA operations during the Soviet occupation of

       The ASG was founded by remnants of the Islamist mujahadeen,
bankrolled and manipulated by the CIA, the Pakistani ISI, and elements of
Saudi Arabia’s wealthy elite during the jihad against the Soviet Union in the
1980s. Philippine Sen. Aquilino Pimentel, Jr. called Abu Sayyaf a “CIA
monster.” 144 According to John Cooley, author of Unholy Wars, the Abu
Sayyaf was the last of the seven Afghan guerrilla groups to be organized late
in the war in Afghanistan in 1986 or three years before the Soviets withdrew.

        The fact is that since the early 1990s, the group which by then had
gone back to Mindanao, has been involved chiefly in criminal operations while
maintaining liaisons with both military and local officials. This is partly the
reason why the group refuses to die. Just as the U.S. has inflated the al-
Qaeda legend, the U.S. and Philippine officials are playing up the Abu Sayyaf
"monster" and its alleged connection to al-Qaeda to justify a bigger U.S.
military assistance program and bigger U.S. operations in the Asia Pacific
region. 145

      As a kidnap-for-ransom group, the Abu Sayyaf has been covertly
supported by some Philippine military and police officers since the 1990s.
Senator Pimentel said that during the Ramos administration (1992-1998),
these officers did not only “handle” but also coddled, trained, protected them,
passed on military equipment and funds from the CIA and its support
network. 146

144   Pimentel, Jr., Sen. Aquilino, “Treasonous handling of the Abu Sayyaf,” privilege
speech, Senate of the Philippines, July 31, 2000 Last accessed Jan. 15,
2007. Also see “The United States in the Philippines: Post-9/11 Imperatives,” Larry
Chin, Online Journal, Aug. 22, 2002.
    Bobby Tuazon,
    According to Sakib Salajin, mayor of Maluso (a hotbed of Abu Sayyaf activity), the Abu Sayyaf
functions as a "protector of foreign drug trafficking syndicates." The group also controls a thriving
marijuana production post. Salajin says his office has compiled "substantial evidence" of drug
trafficking," but said that no funds or personnel were available to plug the problem. Basilan police
director, Chief Supt. Bensali Jabarani, confirmed Salajin's assertion. "Drugs are a major source of Abu
Sayyaf funds," he said. "Aside from drugs from the Golden Triangle, marijuana grown here is exported
to Zamboanga and other parts of the Mindanao mainland." In a paper, Professor Peter Dale Scott writes
that major U.S. military campaigns "whether by coincidence or not, have all aligned the U.S. on the
same side as powerful local drug traffickers. Partly this has been from realpolitik—in recognition of the
local power realities represented by the drug traffic. Partly it has been from the need to escape domestic
political restraints: the traffickers have supplied additional financial resources needed because of U.S.
budgetary limitations, and they have also provided assets not bound (as the U.S. is) by the rules of war.
Indictment                                                                        104

        Both the Bush and Arroyo administrations have lumped the ASG not
only with the MILF with the CPP-NDFP-NPA as well, thereby demonizing the
revolutionary movement along with its alleged front organizations as
“terrorist.” Again, in 2004, the AFP, in its “Military Strategy for Combating
Terrorism,” named the NPA as a “terrorist group.” The same document
identifies each “NPA support element” as a “potential node or critical
vulnerability [that after identification] would be the focus of preemption or swift
and decisive retaliation since such attacks would hurt the enemy the most.” 147

        Likewise, the anti-terrorist and anti-communist hysteria has been used
to justify the rush to enact the Anti-Terrorism Bill (ATB). The bill was passed
by a special joint session of Congress on 19-20 February 2007. Patterned
after the US PATRIOT Act, it strips away the constitutional provisions and the
judicial and due process safeguards and protection against unlawful
harassment, arrest, detention and torture by state forces of anyone tagged
and merely suspected of being a “terrorist”. It lends itself to being used by the
state authorities to intimidate and suppress all forms of political dissent,
including the advocacy of comprehensive social, economic and political
reforms, and deny the people of their basic civil and political rights.

The enactment of an anti-terrorist law has actually been demanded by the
Bush government as another requirement for making the Philippines its
“second front” in the U.S. global “war against terrorism.” The war extends
America’s state power and its national security doctrines across the globe,
particularly the provisions of its much-condemned USA PATRIOT Act, in
suppressing the people’s rights to political dissent and free expressions to
save the “free world” from its “enemies” and “rogue regimes.” It is one
particular component of U.S. aggression in its drive to cause the rewriting of
the constitutions and domestic laws of many countries and tailoring them to its
security objectives at the expense of human, civil and political rights and the
whole array of international laws, conventions, protocols, and human rights
instruments. 148

Furthermore, the anti-terrorist hysteria hatched by the Bush and Arroyo
governments has rekindled discrimination against the Moro population in the
Philippines as indicated, for instance, by frequent police raids on Muslim
communities in Metro Manila and the perpetration of human rights violations
indiscriminately against many Muslims, including women and minors.

And partly (I believe) it has been from a concern to manage the drug traffic itself, and ensure that it
will never fall under the control of another hostile power." Larry Chin, op cit.
    AFP Military Strategy for Combating Terrorism, General Headquarters-AFP, Feb. 18, 2004.
    In at least two occasions in 2006, the U.S. Department of State called the attention of the Arroyo
administration to the absence of “comprehensive” legislations on counterterrorism, reminding the
Philippine President to do so to make the Philippines “a more effective partner in the global
effort…against terrorism and its financing.” Then, on Oct. 1, 2006, Admiral William J. Fallon, U.S.
Commander-in-Chief of the Pacific Command, told former President Fidel V. Ramos for the Philippine
government to pass its anti-terror bill “as soon as possible.” (“U.S. urges Philippines to pass ATB,”
Philippine News Agency).
Indictment                                                                        105


    Based on the foregoing facts and the evidence which will be presented to
the Tribunal, complainants respectfully recommend the following findings,
actions and measures:

With respect to gross and systematic violations of civil and political

1.   defendants Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and George W. Bush and their
     respective governments be adjudged guilty as charged of gross and
     systematic extra-judicial killings, gross and systematic abductions and
     enforced disappearances, gross and systematic torture and gross and
     systematic massacre of Filipino and Bangsa Moro peoples;

2.   defendants Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, George W. Bush and their
     respective governments be adjudged guilty as charged of deliberately
     and massively assaulting, attacking and imposing military occupation of
     communities and villages suspected as CPP-NPA-controlled or
     influenced areas and bailiwicks of progressive mass organizations and
     partylist groups. The attacks consist of aerial and ground bombings,
     heavy artillery fire, strafing, arson, food blockade and illegal imposition of
     military checkpoints and curfew that result in death and injuries, forced
     mass evacuation and displacement, harassment, intimidation, torture
     and illegal arrest and detention of civilians and non-combatants and
     general breakdown of the rule of law and local civilian authority.

3.   These heinous crimes and human rights abuses have been committed
     with the following aggravating circumstances:

   the extra-judicial killings, abductions and enforced disappearances, torture
and massacre are politically-motivated;

   they have been committed by military, police, para-military and other
government-directed forces pursuant to the “total war” policy of the
Macapagal-Arroyo government against the revolutionary forces of the New
People’s Army (NPA) the Communist Party of the Philippines and the National
Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) under the US-directed counter-
insurgency campaign “Oplan Bantay-laya (Operation Plan Safe-guarding
Freedom) and the US global “war on terror.”

   The principal targets and victims of the physical attacks are mass leaders
and activists of legal progressive organizations and partylist groups engaged
in parliamentary and legal struggles for fundamental reforms and genuine
Indictment                                                                        106

national sovereignty and democracy whom the defendants have maliciously
labeled as “front” organizations of the CPP and the NPA;

     the commission of these heinous crimes and human rights abuses is a
       state policy, centrally-directed from the highest level of the defendants’
       decision-making process and continue to be committed with escalating
       impunity callousness and brutality;

With respect to gross and systematic violations of the economic, social
and cultural rights:

   In furtherance of the Filipino people’s economic, social and cultural rights
which are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of the Rights of Peoples (or
the Algiers Declaration of 1976), the United Nations (UN) International
Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR) and Convention
on the Elimination of all forms of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW),
the various conventions of the International Labor Organization (ILO), and
other applicable international laws, treaties and conventions, we hereby
appeal to the Permanent People’s Tribunal (PPT) to:

1.      defendants Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo and George W. Bush and their
        respective governments, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the
        World Bank (WB), the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the
        various transnational corporations (TNCs) be adjudged guilty as
        charged of the gross and systematic violations of economic, social and
        cultural rights of the Filipino and Bangsa Moro peoples which have
        resulted in the destruction of their livelihoods, their deepening poverty
        and the worsening of their welfare.

2.      declare that the willful, deliberate and sustained actions of the
        defendants and their systematic attacks on the rights of the people
        have greatly contributed to the intensified exploitation of workers and
        peasants, the worsening oppression of women and children, the
        cultural disintegration of national minorities, and the severe destruction
        of the environment.

3.      declare that the neocolonial economic and social system imposed on
        the people by U.S. imperialism in collaboration with domestic economic
        and political elites directly transgresses economic sovereignty, leads to
        the unrestrained plunder of the national patrimony, deepens the
        backward, agrarian and pre-industrial state of the economy, and
        effectively denies the majority of the people their basic rights to food,
        health, education, housing and work.

4.      declare that the U.S., Japanese, European and other foreign monopoly
        capitalists operating in the country have made their superprofits from
        the sheer exploitation of the people and the gross plunder of the
        national patrimony in violation of the people’s just share in the fruits of
        their labors and of their sovereign rights to the country’s natural
Indictment                                                                        107

       resources, and correspondingly to affirm the right of the people to
       effective remedies.

5.     declare the corrupt government of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo guilty of
       plundering the scarce economic resources of the Filipino people and to
       call for the regime to be held criminally- liable for its actions.

6.     declare as null and void the grossly inequitable bilateral and
       multilateral treaties and agreements imposed on the Filipino people by
       the big imperialist powers and successive Philippine governments,
       including that of Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, which make the economy
       function mainly for the benefit of foreign monopoly capital and which
       have severely undermined domestic agriculture and industry. This
       particularly includes the unprecedented far-reaching and expansive
       agreements under the WTO.

7.     affirm the sovereign right of the Filipino people to resist all forms of
       foreign economic, social and cultural aggression and domination and
       to undertake any and all measures necessary to uphold the people’s
       welfare including implementing genuine programs of agrarian reform
       and national industrialization, forging foreign trade and investment
       relations based on the principles of equality, independence and mutual
       benefit, ensuring just wages and decent jobs for workers, ensuring
       land and livelihoods for the peasantry, securing social services, and
       asserting the right to self-determination of national minorities.

8.     call for the absolute and unconditional cancellation of all illegitimate
       Philippine debt that is patently onerous, imbued with corruption, forced
       by creditors, used for projects harmful to the people and environment,
       merely borrowing to repay debt, and whose uninterrupted repayments
       over the decades have wrought social, cultural, ecological and
       economic devastation. In particular, call for the return of payments on
       the billions of dollars in debt servicing on debt incurred by the dictator
       Marcos, which is the most brazenly illegitimate and odious debt burden
       suffered by the people.

9.     condemn the U.S. government for systematically supporting,
       sustaining and strengthening the oppressive and exploitative Arroyo
       regime, through among others infusions of debt financing and
       economic aid, so that it may act to advance U.S. economic and
       geopolitical interests.

With respect to the gross and systematic violations of the rights of the
people to national self-determination and liberation:

   In furtherance of the Filipino people’s rights to national self-determination
and liberation which are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of the Rights
of Peoples (or the Algiers Declaration of 1976), the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights of 1948, the UN Charter, the UN’s seven international human
Indictment                                                                        108

rights instruments particularly the International Convention on Civil and
Political Rights (ICCPR of 1966), the Nuremberg Principles as adopted by the
General Assembly of the United Nations, the Comprehensive Agreement on
the Respect of Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law
(CARHRIHL) signed between the Government of the Republic of the
Philippines (GRP) and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines
(NDFP), and all other applicable international laws, treaties and conventions,
we hereby appeal to the Honorable Jurors and Judges of the Permanent
People’s Tribunal (PPT) to:

1.     declare the Mutual Defense Treaty (MDT) of 1951, the Visiting Forces
       Agreement (VFA) of 1999, Mutual Logistics Support Agreement
       (MLSA) of 2002 and Non-Surrender Agreement of 2003 which were
       contracted in disregard of the fundamental rights of the people as null
       and void and for all obligations provided for under the aforementioned
       instruments to cease;

2.     declare all operations, activities, programs and military aid done and
       extended in pursuit of the aforementioned unequal treaty and
       agreements in contravention of the rights of the Filipino people to be
       free from any foreign interference and military aggression, to peaceful
       life and existence, and their national sovereignty and territorial integrity
       be respected by other countries as part of their international obligation;

3.     adjudge defendants Government of the United States of America and
       President George W. Bush, Jr. in particular, guilty of the international
       crimes it committed and is continuing to commit against the Filipino
       people under the pretext of “war against terrorism” including, in
       particular, the displacement of whole communities; deaths, injuries,
       rape, torture and other physical harassments; as well as the
       destruction of the environment;

4.     adjudge defendants Government of the United States of America and
       President George W. Bush, Jr. in particular, guilty of the international
       crimes it has committed against the Filipino people as a result of its
       collusion with and support for the Government of President Gloria M.
       Arroyo in conducting the “war against terrorism” and “counter-
       insurgency” such as, in particular, the brutal militarization of
       communities; extra-judicial killings, abductions, and enforced
       disappearances; illegal arrests and detention; torture and sexual
       abuse; and other forms of gross and systematic violations of human

5.     adjudge defendant Gloria M. Arroyo guilty for the treasonous acts of
       upholding and signing unequal treaties and agreements with the U.S.
       Government as well as for her declaration of support to President
       George W. Bush, Jr.’s “war against terrorism” in disregard of
       international law; and for the “war against terrorism” and “counter
       insurgency” campaigns that have resulted in the wanton, gross and
       systematic violations of human rights of the Filipino people despite
Indictment                                                                        109

       persistent international demands to put a stop to these crimes and to
       protect the civil and political rights of the people;

6.     declare the Arroyo regime, for its subservience to a foreign power, the
       U.S., its blatant abuse of state power, and its acts of state terrorism as
       deprived of legitimate standing as a government in international society
       and lacking in the competence to act on behalf of the Filipino or
       Bangsa Moro people;

7.     support the demand of the Filipino people to make the U.S.
       Government accountable for the toxic contamination of communities in
       the Philippines as a result of the operations and activities in its former
       military bases which have resulted in numerous deaths, injuries,
       deformities and other health hazards, as well as for the economic
       losses and destruction of the environment such operations have
       wrought and continue to cause; that such legitimate demand by the
       Filipino people be given due course in a court of justice in the
       international community to compel the U.S. Government to fulfill its
       international obligation by way of indemnification, clean-up of the
       contaminated areas and communities and other forms of legal relief
       and remedies;

8.     call for an immediate stop to Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s “total war”
       policy against the Filipino people including the Bangsa Moro
       compatriots in southern Philippines and for the immediate pullout of all
       U.S. forces from the Philippines as well as Philippine security forces
       from parts of the country where military operations are ongoing
       resulting in the gross and systematic violations of human rights;

9.     demand that the U.S. government and EU countries stop their
       “terrorist” labeling of the CPP-NPA and Prof. Jose Maria Sison in
       accordance with international law and in consonance with Point 5 of
       the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal’s “Judgment of the Appeals of the
       Filipino people and the Bangsa Moro people” on the First Session on
       the Philippines (1980) recognizing the status of the National
       Democratic Front of the Philippines as a belligerent and legitimate
       representative of its people;

10.    call for the resumption of peace talks between the GRP and the NDFP
       in accordance with the agreements signed between the two parties
       including the CARHRIHL and in cognizance of the demands of the
       interfaith community, human rights organizations, people’s
       organizations and NGOs both in the Philippines and abroad for the
       resumption of the peace process that would provide for the
       comprehensive solution of the social, economic and political roots of
       the people’s struggle toward a just and lasting peace;

11.    declare the Filipino people’s struggle for national self-determination
       and liberation as well as the Moro people’s struggle for self-
       determination and to their ancestral land as legitimate in consonance
Indictment                                                                        110

       with the Permanent People’s Tribunal’s “Judgment on the Appeals of
       the Filipino people and the Bangsa Moro people” on the First Session
       of the Philippines (1980) and, accordingly, to reiterate the principles of
       Point 15 of the same Judgment, calling upon world public opinion,
       progressive governments, organizations and individuals, to lend their
       support to the struggle of the Filipino and Bangsa Moro peoples to
       achieve national self-determination, liberation from the U.S.-Arroyo
       regime and the neo-colonial system of repression.

12.    call on the Philippine Senate to immediately work for the ratification of
       the Rome Statute of 1998 or the International Criminal Court (ICC)
       Treaty in furtherance of the demand of human rights organizations, the
       church and faith community, civil libertarians and other sectors for the
       Philippine government to comply with its pledge to uphold international
       law and to protect the human rights of the Filipino people foremost of
       which is their rights to national self-determination and liberation.


Hustisya – Evangeline Hernandez (Head Convenor)
Desaparacidos – Aleli Dew Ayroso (Coordinator)
SELDA – Donato Continente (Coordinator)
BAYAN – Dr. Carol Araullo (Chairperson)

Assisted by:
Romeo T. Capulong – Chief Prosecutor
Jan Fermon
Bernard Tomlow
Rachel F. Pastores
Amylyn B. Sato
Neri B. Colmenares
Edre U. Olalia
Jobert Pahilga
Noel Neri
Rex Fernandez
Alnie Foja

To top