|
|
|
Madrigal, Gonzalez said, may be liable for violating certain laws in signing the joint communiqué. “The communiqué can be used as evidence against her if and when the situation described there arises,” Gonzalez told media July 2. The justice secretary referred to a February 2007 deadline to oust Arroyo, which was supposed to be in the communiqué. The National Security Adviser, meanwhile, lambasted Madrigal for “stooping so low” in “conspiring” with the CPP. “Sen. Jamby Madrigal and bourgeois politicians like her who seek alliance with the CPP, the NPA, and the National Democratic Front may not understand basic politico-economic and ideological realities and positions. If so, they show their unworthiness for public office in a democracy,” Gonzales, who also heads the Partido Demokratiko Sosyalista ng Pilipinas (PDSP or Democratic Socialist Party of the Philippines) told media. For his part, Presidential Chief of Staff Mike Defensor said the Arroyo administration would never allow the GRP negotiating panel to meet the NDFP negotiating panel and would engage only in local peace talks. In a copy obtained by Bulatlat, the communiqué calls for the resumption of the GRP-NDFP peace talks “as soon as possible.” It also calls on the Filipino people to unite in solving the roots of the armed conflict through fundamental economic, social and political reforms; urges both the GRP and the NDFP to address the question about the “terrorist” listing through assertion of Philippine sovereignty and recognition of a Supreme Court doctrine that “acts of terrorism” do not exist in Philippine law; criticizes the all-out war policy employed by the Arroyo regime, and urges the GRP to resolve the killings of legal and political activists by condemning and investigating these. The communiqué assailed the Arroyo regime for its alleged responsibility for electoral fraud, high unemployment, the rising cost of living, unbridled corruption, mounting debt and tax burden, abuse of women and children, disregard for indigenous people’s rights, and environmental destruction. However, there was no specific call for President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s ouster. Upon her arrival from The Netherlands on July 5, Madrigal told reporters: “Anyone has a right to do something for the peace talks.” No violation In an interview with Bulatlat, Edre Olalia, a member of the Counsels for the Defense of Liberties (Codal) and the International Association of People’s Lawyers (IAPL), said Madrigal did not violate any law in signing the joint communiqué. “There is no cogent and valid factual or legal basis to charge her for such acts,” Olalia said. “The elements of treason, sedition or whatever crime that comes even remotely to it is simply not present and are inapplicable under the given circumstances.” “Gonzalez’s threat is at best another puny manifestation of his gross ignorance and basic misunderstanding of elementary principles of criminal law and at worst as another arrogant and brazen display of self-righteousness and the Philippine government’s vindictive and persecutory complex – or both,” Olalia added. Sison, in a statement released to media on July 4, made a similar observation. “In effect, he likewise accuses of wrongdoing all the officials of the regime who have met the NDFP negotiating panel and the NDFP chief political consultant,” said Sison, who has been on exile in The Netherlands since his passport was canceled by the Philippine government in 1989. The threats to file charges against Madrigal for meeting with the NDFP negotiating panel came very shortly before Arroyo certified as urgent the Anti-Terrorism Bill, which is now under deliberation at the Senate following its approval at the House of Representatives. In Sec. 7 of the bill, “Establishing, maintaining or serving as contact or link with any person or group of persons or organization/s who have pursued or are pursuing terrorism” is listed among several acts that “facilitate, contribute to or promote terrorism.” Under the bill, conviction of any act that facilitates, contributes to or promotes terrorism carries the penalty of either death or life imprisonment with a fine of at least P10 million – the same penalty for the commission of “terroristic” acts. In case it is passed, can the Anti-Terrorism Bill be used against anyone meeting with the NDFP even in the interest of the peace negotiations? Olalia said it cannot, strictly speaking. “Legally speaking and without any element of arbitrariness or political persecution involved, the ATB can not be used against anyone who would engage the NDFP in any dialogue in the interest of peace negotiations,” he said. “But given that laws are twisted, slanted and given a spin to suit the selfish personal and career interests of those in power, the ATB may be improperly used, abused or misused as an instrument of harassment and persecution.” In his July 4 statement, Sison also said the statements of the justice secretary, the national security adviser, and the presidential chief of staff signify that the Arroyo regime is bent on ending the GRP-NDFP peace talks. Peace-seeking not terrorism Olalia for his part, said that no one should be penalized or taken to task for talking to the NDFP in pursuit of the peace talks with the GRP. “Talking to the NDFP in a dialogue precisely in the interest of a just and lasting peace should be one of the most laudatory and noble patriotic acts and should not be corrupted as ‘dealing with terrorists’ or ‘terrorism’ itself, terms which are but mere arbitrary political labels ironically used to terrorize, silence or pressure those fighting for basic democratic rights, liberation and justice for the people,” he said. Bulatlat
BACK TO TOP ■ PRINTER-FRIENDLY VERSION ■ COMMENT
© 2006 Bulatlat ■ Alipato Media Center Permission is granted to reprint or redistribute this article, provided its author/s and Bulatlat are properly credited and notified.
|
