If he were to have his way, Anakpawis Rep. Crispin Beltran would like to be a member of the House Committee on National Defense. That way, he said, he can help start investigations into the Witness Protection Program, extra-judicial killings and forced disappearances.
BY ALEXANDER MARTIN REMOLLINO
Bulatlat
Vol. VII, No. 25, July 29-Aug. 4, 2007
Anakpawis (Toiling Masses) Rep. Crispin Beltran wants to join, among other House Committees, the Committee on National Defense. This, he said, is so he could help initiate and actively take part in investigations in aid of legislation into extra-judicial killings and forced disappearances.
Based on data from Karapatan (Alliance for the Advancement of People’s Rights), a total of 885 people have been killed extra-judicially from January 2001, when President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo was catapulted to power through a popular uprising, to June 2007. Meanwhile, 183 persons are recorded as having been forcibly disappeared during the same period.
State forces have been identified as the perpetrators in many of the prominent cases of extra-judicial killings and forced disappearances.
“In particular, I would like to see an investigation into the Witness Protection Program (which is often paraded as an instrument toward the resolution of cases of extra-judicial killings and forced disappearances),” Beltran told Bulatlat in an interview.
“In her recent SoNA (State of the Nation Address), Arroyo pledged increased support for the Witness Protection Program,” Beltran pointed out. “But in reality there is no Witness Protection Program. Why? The ones who are tasked with taking care of the witnesses are the military and police, who are involved in the extra-judicial killings (and forced disappearances). How can you trust such a Witness Protection Program?”
The Witness Protection Program, which traces its origins to the 18-year-old Republic Act No. 6981 or the Witness Protection, Security and Benefit Act, entitles witnesses to, among other things, “a secure housing facility until he has testified or until the threat, intimidation or harassment disappears or is reduced to a manageable or tolerable level.”
“When the circumstances warrant, the Witness shall be entitled to relocation and/or change of personal identity at the expense of the Program,” Sec. 8 (a) of RA 6981 states. “This right may be extended to any member of the family of the Witness within the second civil degree of consanguinity or affinity.”
There is nothing in the law, however, which clearly defines what may be considered a “manageable or tolerable level” of threat, intimidation or harassment. Furthermore, it is easily noticeable that under RA 6981 the program officers retain the option of removing the witness from the secure housing facility upon completion of his/her testimony.
These provisions give witnesses no assurance that they will be safe from retaliatory actions that may probably result from their testimonies. The fear that they may be hunted down by those they would be testifying against is known to have discouraged many potential witnesses from coming out in the open.
“So there is no such thing as a Witness Protection Program,” he added. “That’s all bluff.”
Arrest and detention
Meanwhile, Beltran is thankful that he and the so-called Batasan 5 representatives in the 13th Congress – Satur Ocampo, Teddy Casiño, and Joel Virador of Bayan Muna (People First); Rafael Mariano of Anakpawis; and Liza Maza of the Gabriela Women’s Party (GWP) – were all already out by the time the Human Security Act of 2007 (HSA), also known as the Anti-Terrorism Law, took effect. “If we were still in prison or protective custody by the time the HSA took effect, the government could use that law to prolong our detention,” he told Bulatlat in an interview.
“It seems the Supreme Court justices saw what may be in store under the HSA,” Beltran said, “and went in a hurry at dismissing the charges against us before the law could be applied on our case.”
Beltran had been arrested without warrant in February last year in connection with an alleged conspiracy between the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and the dissident soldiers’ group Makabayang Kawal Pilipino (MKP or Patriotic Filipino Soldiers) to topple the Arroyo government. He was subsequently charged with rebellion, and confined under police custody at the Philippine Heart Center.
Beltran’s arrest took place during the effectivity of Presidential Proclamation No. 1017, which declared a “state of national emergency” in the country.
Meanwhile, the Batasan 5 sought protective custody at the House of Representatives to elude the possibility of unlawful arrest.
The information against Beltran was later amended to include the Batasan 5, as well as other personalities – among them Jose Maria Sison, Vicente Ladlad, Rafael Baylosis, Randall Echanis, Rey Claro Casambre, and Elisa “Tita” Lubi.
The evidences used by the Department of Justice (DoJ) in the case against Beltran, the Batasan 5, and other personalities were based on the premise of a supposed organizational linkage between the underground CPP, New People’s Army (NPA) and National Democratic Front (NDF) and the legal cause-oriented groups. The 492 documents filed by the government span the entire history of what is broadly termed the national-democratic movement, from 1968 to the filing of the information last year.
In justifying Beltran’s warrantless arrest, the government used the theory of rebellion as “continuing crime,” which figures most prominently in the 1991 Supreme Court decision on the case of Roberto Umil v. Fidel V. Ramos, which involved among other things the warrantless arrest of alleged NPA member Rolando Dural who was undergoing treatment at the St. Agnes Hospital in Quezon City when seized by state forces.
The Supreme Court ruled that Dural’s warrantless arrest was lawful. It cited the NPA as an organization with an “ideological base which compels the repetition of the same acts of lawlessness and violence until the overriding objective of overthrowing organized government is attained.” The High Tribunal ruled that Dural did not cease to be an NPA member when he underwent medical treatment.
Art. 134 of the Revised Penal Code defines rebellion or insurrection thus:
“The crime of rebellion or insurrection is committed by rising publicly and taking arms against the Government for the purpose of removing from the allegiance to said Government or its laws, the territory of the Philippine Islands or any part thereof, of any body of land, naval or other armed forces, depriving the Chief Executive or the Legislature, wholly or partially, of any of their powers or prerogatives.”
“The real reason I was arrested is because I was actively campaigning for Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo’s ouster and against the administration’s charter change drive,” Beltran said. “Is that an armed uprising? The only weapon used there is saliva.”
HSA and human rights
Under the HSA, the elements of terrorism are: commission of the crimes of rebellion or insurrection, coup d’ etat, murder, arson, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, crimes involving destruction, arson, piracy and highway robbery among others, “thereby sowing and creating a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand.”
But there is nothing in the HSA that prevents unarmed and legal cause-oriented or opposition groups like the Bagong Alyansang Makabayan (Bayan or New Patriotic Alliance) and the United Opposition (UNO) from being accused of fronting for “communist” or “rebel military” organizations – as the Arroyo administration has repeatedly done. Likewise there is nothing in the said law that prevents journalists covering “insurgency” or even legal mass actions from being accused of “conspiracy to commit terrorism.”
The HSA legalizes the warrantless arrest and prolonged detention of people just suspected – not even caught in the act – of committing “terrorism” or “conspiring to commit terrorism” as defined in the said law.
Using the same theory of rebellion as “continuing crime” and the definition of “terrorism” under the HSA, the government could have used the said law to justify keeping Beltran
“The HSA does not choose its targets,” Beltran said. “Once you’re tagged as a member of the CPP-NPA or any of its ‘front organizations,’ the weight of state force will be upon you. There can be no doubt about it, this law is martial law.”
Because of this, Beltran said, one of his first legislative measures has been the filing of a bill repealing the HSA. A similar bill has been filed in the Senate by Sen. Jamby Madrigal – one of only two senators who voted against the Anti-Terrorism Bill last February, the other being Sen. Mar Roxas.
Beltran said he also supports the petition filed at the Supreme Court to have the HSA declared as unconstitutional. The said petition was filed two weeks ago by several personalities and organizations, including former Vice President Teofisto Guingona, Jr. and National Artist for Literature Bienvenido Lumbera.
The labor-leader-turned-lawmaker said human rights issues will be prominent on the agenda of the progressive party-list bloc in the 14th Congress.
“Our battlecry is the same: land, wages, jobs, and rights,” Beltran said. “In the 14th Congress we will place particular focus on rights, because we can see that (the government has) worked on us (activists) so much.” Bulatlat
