Why should we say #NoToRedTagging? Antonio Parlade Jr. and the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict are deliberately twisting facts and spreading lies against the Left to justify the government's crackdown on dissent. Here's a short thread of some fast facts:
Legal democratic forces—among them mass organizations, alliances, and duly-elected party-lists—are not "fronts" of communists rebels. The act of red-tagging peddles this dangerous lie that infringes upon international humanitarian law and the people's right to freely organize.
Why? Red-tagging maliciously and deliberately blurs the distinction between armed rebel combatants and unarmed civilian activists in order to justify state violence against activists and human rights defenders. Red-tagging—among many other things—is a very insidious death threat.
Furthermore, the government is using "counterterrorism" as a deceptive front to legalize its fascist crackdown on both civilian activists and rebel combatants by falsely tagging them as "terrorists"—which will be further empowered once the Anti-Terrorism Act takes full effect.
Under Philippine laws, being a communist rebel is still not terrorism: the Communist Party of the Philippines and the New People's Army are yet to be legally declared as a terrorist group. Being part of the party is also not illegal since the Anti-Subversion Law was repealed.
In fact, that Philippine government recognizes communist rebels as parties to armed conflict with the signing of the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law between the government and the National Democratic Front of the Philippines.
Instead of addressing the legitimate roots of armed conflict to achieve just and lasting peace, the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict is simply a fascist task force whose job is to crack down on dissent—and this task force should be defunded and abolished.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Thread: police brutality in the Philippines didn’t start under Rodrigo Duterte and they aren’t isolated cases: the Philippine National Police has long been a rotten institution since policing was built as an apparatus of repression—to serve and protect colonialism and capitalism.
This is clear in our history and in the history of modern policing in general: the gendarmerie Philippine Constabulary, the Philippine National Police’s predecessor, was formed in 1901 for colonial subjugation: to crush anti-colonial guerrillas and anti-imperialist labor unions.
Tactics now considered hallmarks of modern policing—surveillance, profiling, infiltration, “riot” control, patrolling—developed in the Philippine Constabulary’s colonial pacification drive were brought to the United States to develop their own police forces against labor strikes.
#RememberKian brings me back to covering his funeral three years ago as I stood before his tombstone and found out that we share the same birthday; what was more tragic for me was finding out from his friends mere moments after he was buried that he wanted to become a policeman.
I remember Kian Loyd Delos Santos' father, Saldy, as I was writing my thesis on the depiction of state violence in FPJ's Ang Probinsyano. I remember his father in tears, telling before a Senate hearing how his son wanted to be a policeman because of the teleserye. #RememberKian
Had Kian Loyd Delos Santos been alive, he would've turned 20 last May, he could've been in college now. That Kian Loyd wanted to be a policeman and that he was brutally killed by policemen three years ago is perhaps one of the saddest tragedies of his unjust death. #RememberKian
Warning: this is a graphic on-ground footage of the fatal shooting incident in Pasong Putik yesterday, currently circulating on Facebook.
After the police shot the victim twice, a nearby resident can be heard screaming: “Bakit niyo binaril, sir? Dapat kinapkapan niyo muna!”
An alleged copy of the police report of the incident states that the police recovered a loaded revolver from the victim’s sling bag. Witnesses cited by CNN’s report, however, claim that the victim had no firearms. The victim’s sister also reiterated this in a GMA News interview.
Last April 17, United Nations special rapporteurs reminded governments that “[b]reaking a curfew, or any restriction on freedom of movement, cannot justify resorting to excessive use of force by the police; under no circumstances should it lead to the use of lethal force.”
This is true, in the legal sense: the president did not declare one in the first place—and it can only be declared if there is rebellion (there is an ongoing one for the past 51 years), an invasion, or if required by public safety.
But then, the president treats the pandemic like an invasion, like a rebellion, like an insurgency—in short, war. It seems to be this regime’s favorite word, such that the state of national emergency becomes translated as a “state of war against an unseen enemy.”
“We are in a state of war”—so retired generals who led the government’s brutal counterinsurgency campaigns need to be at the helm of the fight against this “unseen enemy.” Military rule is now virtually imposed on an already militarized civilian bureaucracy because we are at war.