Red-tagging in the Philippines
In the Philippines, red-tagging is the labeling of individuals or organizations as communists, subversives, or terrorists,[1] regardless of their actual political beliefs or affiliations.[2] It is a type of harassment and has pernicious effects on its targets.[3] Red-tagging has been practiced by security forces,[4][5][6][7] government officials or shills.
The practice is a relic of the Cold War and has had a long history in the former American colony.[8] Cause-oriented groups including the United Nations,[9] Amnesty International,[10] and Human Rights Watch[11] warn that its use as a political tactic undermines Philippine democracy by stifling dissent, producing a chilling effect on general discourse and, more insidiously, encouraging assassinations and retaliations.[12][13]
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#0__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#0__subtitleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#0__call_to_action.textDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$Effects[edit]
Human rights violations[edit]
Red-tagging impinges on the right to free expression and dissent according to media and rights groups.[14] The Philippine Commission on Human Rights (CHR) also noted that red-tagging threatens the lives or safety of individuals.[15] The act of red-tagging human-rights defenders constitutes a grave threat to their lives, liberty, and security. It creates a distortion to the nature of their work and makes them susceptible to attacks and a number of violations as emphasized by the CHR.[16] The killing of four activists in June 2015 in Sorsogon City may have been the result of the activists's membership in groups that were red-tagged by the Philippine government, according to Amnesty International.[17] Security forces have raided the offices of these red-tagged organizations and arrested members of these organizations.[18] The raids have been described as a crackdown on dissent.[18]
The Philippine independent news organization Vera Files notes that since President Rodrigo Duterte declared the Communist Party of the Philippines and the New People's Army terrorist organizations under the Human Security Act of 2007, individuals and organizations who have been red-tagged are vulnerable to interception and recording of communication, detention without charges, restricted travel and personal liberties, examination of bank records, and the seizure and sequestration of their assets.[3] Reporters Without Borders notes that red-tagged individuals are vulnerable to death threats and violence.[19] In some instances, targets of red-tagging are also harassed by accusations of terrorism.[14]
According to CHR Spokesperson Jacqueline de Guia, this kind of labeling may have serious consequences on the security of the groups or individuals that are being tagged. Additionally, Karapatan states that this jeopardizes the initiatives of human rights organizations and defenders to inform the public about the violation of rights in the Philippines.[20]
Karapatan Deputy Secretary General Roneo Clamor said that human rights defenders who are red-tagged are not only illegally arrested, some are also killed. According to him, the National Task Force (NTF) was made to hinder the human rights defenders to get justice for the victims.[21]
Extrajudicial killings[edit]
The CHR stated that red-tagging needs to be seen in the context of the increasing extrajudicial killings in rural Philippines and the government's counterinsurgency program.[15][22] From July 2016 to November 2019, Karapatan documented 293 victims of extrajudicial killings perpetrated in line with the counterinsurgency program, with 167 defenders killed or an average of one to two HRDs killed every week. At least 429 were victims of frustrated killings.[23] They also documented at least 14 massacres and hundreds of victims of extrajudicial killings (including 28 children) under President Aquino's term.[24]
After redtagging of various personalities by Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade in October 2020, Senator Panfilo Lacson ordered the general summoned to senate hearing.[25] Defense Secretary Delfin Lorenzana had also warned against making baseless accusations, indirectly referring to Parlade's statements and double-downs.[26]
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#2__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#2__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
Government response to the concept[edit]
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#5__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#3__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
Duterte administration[edit]
Government officials and former press secretary Rigoberto Tiglao said that it was Sison himself who had unwittingly "tagged" specific groups red,[117] including by identifying them online.[118][119] Sison disputed this by stating that, "I differentiated the legal forces of the National Democratic movement from the armed revolutionary movement."[120]
On October 27, 2020, Parladé clarified that, "Communism per se … if it's just belief in communism and that belief isn't paired with violence, I think everyone would get along. … In fact, in Europe … there are still many communist parties, but that's okay since they don't maintain armed wings. Their societies have come to accept them. But over here, it's different: [the CPP-1968] has an armed wing. And that's why we're having this problem."[121] Likewise, on March 16, 2021, he said that, "It's the same with the right: if you're far right, and you [cross the line] by taking up arms and trying to overthrow the [government], that's a whole other story."[122]
Human rights organizations denounced the government for red-tagging, profiling, and surveillance.[123]
In 2019, United Nations rapporteurs said that the "criminalizing discourse used by Philippine public officials undermines the value of the vital work of human rights defenders, denigrates them in the eyes of the public and may put them at risk of threats, violence or other forms of harassment", adding that threats and harassment hinder the groups from doing their work.[124]
In a 2020 report, the Commission on Human Rights called on members of the executive branch of government to desist from red-tagging and labelling defenders as terrorists or enemies of the state and to prohibit the practice.[125]
Marcos administration[edit]
In an interview on June 9, 2022, incoming National Security Adviser Clarita Carlos expressed a strong disapproval of red-tagging, stating that under the incoming presidency of Bongbong Marcos, the administration will focus on the lack of opportunities and injustices that are not being addressed that are at "the roots of insurgency".[126] This was echoed by outgoing Department of Justice (DOJ) secretary and incoming Solicitor General Menardo Guevarra, who stated at a forum on June 15 that the DOJ does not condone labeling individuals and groups as those with links to armed insurgency groups, saying that if there is concrete evidence, it should be filed according to the legal process.[127] Guevarra also discouraged tagging individuals solely for being vocal about their political views as doing so would put them in danger.[127] In response to some NTF-ELCAC officials that have publicly red-tagged individuals and groups, Guevarra also stated that the DOJ has expressed its position to the NTF-ELCAC, but is unaware if his advice has been followed. Furthermore, Guevara reminds that the NTF-ELCAC must follow its main mandate of a "whole of nation approach" to the communist insurgency problem, which must attract insurgents to return to the "folds of the law" and not to openly engage them in combat.[127]
In July 2023, the Supreme Court of the Philippines ruled in Siegfred D. Deduro Vs. Maj. Gen. Eric C. Vinoya, in his capacity as Commanding Officer of the 3rd Infantry Division, Philippine Army that a writ of amparo may be issued against acts of red-tagging, vilification, labeling, and guilt by association, declaring that the aforementioned acts threatens a person's right to life, liberty, and security.[128][129]
In February 2024, United Nations Special Rapporteur for freedom of expression and opinion Irene Khan appealed to the Philippine government to end red-tagging, saying that the vilification is often "followed by threats, unlawful surveillance, attacks or even unlawful killing."[130]
After the Supreme Court ruled in May 2024 that red-tagging threatens a person's right to life, liberty, or security, Human Rights Watch and Karapatan called on President Bongbong Marcos to abolish the NTF-ELCAC. Marcos rejected the calls for abolition, saying the task force was instrumental in reducing the country's internal security threat.[131][132]
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__descriptionDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__heading--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__description--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__heading--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__description--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__heading--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__description--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__heading--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__description--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__heading--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#4__description--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#7__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#7__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#6__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#8__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#8__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__titleDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__subtextDEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--0DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--1DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--2DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--3DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--4DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--5DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--6DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$
$_$_$DEEZ_NUTS#1__answer--7DEEZ_NUTS$_$_$