Kung si Liza, Angel, at Catriona e ganoon na lang pagbantaan ng mga nasa pwesto, paano pa yung mga ordinaryong Pilipino?
If this also happens to you or anyone you know, here are some of the legal remedies available: [THREAD]
Victims of red tagging can use the law to go after those responsible for vilifying them. They can sue for injunction, damages, libel, amparo, or habeas data.
They can file complaints with the Ombudsman, the Armed Forces of the Philippines, and the Philippine National Police. And they can report the red tagging to the Commission on Human Rights and the United Nations.
Here’s a rundown of available legal remedies:
1. Injunction. Victims of red tagging can file a petition for injunction and temporary restraining order.
In 1953, the Supreme Court issued an injunction to restrain the arrest of Claro M. Recto, Jose P. Laurel, Lorenzo M. Tanada and Arsenio H. Lacson, who had been red tagged by Oscar Castelo, the Defense and Justice Secretary under then President Elpidio Quirino.
2. Damages. Victims of red tagging can also file a civil suit for damages against the person responsible, under Article 32 of the Civil Code, which provides that any public official or private person who directly or indirectly obstructs, violates,
or impairs a person’s right to liberty and security of person, right to be a member of organizations for purposes not contrary to law, or right to participate in peaceable assemblies to petition the Government for redress of grievances, among others, shall be liable for damages.
3. Libel. Victims can also file civil or criminal cases of libel against the person responsible, for damaging their honor and reputation.
4. Administrative complaints. Complaints for misconduct and other administrative offenses can be filed with the following offices:
a. The Office of the Deputy Ombudsman for the Military and Other Law Enforcement Offices (OMB-MOLEO);
b. The Office of the Chief of Staff and the Office of the Inspector General of the Armed Forces of the Philippines;
c. The Office of the Inspector General and the Internal Affairs Service of the Philippine National Police.
If warranted, the complaints could result in the suspension or removal of the military or law enforcement officer.
5. Court-martial. As Atty. @TedTe recently pointed out, military officials responsible for red tagging may be held liable by court-martials for violating the following Articles of War:
a. Article 91, which prohibits anyone subject to military law from using any reproachful or provoking speeches or gestures to another;
b. Article 94, which provides that anyone subject to military law who commits any crime or breach of law
punishable as a criminal offense shall be punished as a court martial may direct;
c. Article 96, which prohibits conduct unbecoming of an officer and a gentleman and provides that anyone convicted of this offense shall be dismissed from the service; and
d. Article 97, which states that “all disorders and neglects to the prejudice of good order and military discipline,” and all conduct that brings discredit to the military service, “shall be taken cognizance of by a…court-martial…and punished at the discretion of the court.”
6. Writs of habeas data and amparo. Victims of red tagging may also file petitions for writs of habeas data and amparo. While previous amparo petitions for red tagging did not prosper, your case might be the one to pierce the veil of litigation.
Amparo was designed to protect our right to life, liberty and security of person and should be a shield to protect us from red tagging.
Habeas data may also be invoked to protect our right to privacy in life, liberty or security of person which is jeopardized by red tagging.
7. CHR and United Nations. Victims can also report the red tagging to the Commission on Human Rights (CHR) and to the following bodies or officials of the United Nations:
(1) the Human Rights Council;
(2) the Human Rights Committee and other UN Committees; and
(3) the various Special Rapporteurs (on human rights, torture, extrajudicial executions, violence against women, and indigenous peoples, among others).
Pag may isang Pilipino silang pinapatahimik at tinatakot—si Liza, Angel, Catriona, o kahit sino pa—lahat tayo pinapatahimik at tinatakot nila. Wag natin palampasin ito. Panagutin natin ang mga mapang-api at naghahari-hariang opisyal na yan.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
If you’ve ever experienced how unfair our justice system is, here are even more reasons to #NeverForget and say #NeverAgain. A thread:
Nung panahon ng Martial Law, maraming naging biktima ng human rights violations. Maraming dinakip. Maraming tinorture. Meron ding mga pinatay. Pero hindi lang tao ang pinatay ng Martial Law. Today I will tell you the story of how the Marcoses killed justice in the Philippines.
It all began a week after Martial Law was declared. September 29, 1972, Ferdinand Marcos issued Letter of Instruction No. 11.
Anong nakalagay sa LOI 11? Lahat ng nasa gobyerno, dapat mag-submit ng letters of resignation—pati mga judge.
Studied Senate Bill No. 1083. We should be very concerned about these provisions:
(1/5)
SB1083 gives the Anti-Terrorism Council the power to authorize the prolonged detention of suspects arrested without warrant and to “designate” any person or group they suspect, and subject them to asset freezing. This usurps judicial power.
(2/5)
Because the power to “designate” and to detain can easily be abused or misused, it should be given only to the courts, not the ATC, since judges are impartial, objective, and independent of the executive branch.
(3/5)
The following questions must be answered about the death of Cpl. Winston Ragos:
1. Was Cpl. Ragos really carrying a firearm in his sling bag? What happened to the sling bag after he was shot? Who took it from the crime scene, searched it, and (allegedly) found the weapon?
The Revised PNP Operations Manual provides that it should be the investigator-on-case or the Scene-of-the-Crime-Officer, not the operatives involved in the incident, who should take charge of and process the crime scene.
2. Why did Cpl. Ragos’ sister insist that he was unarmed, when the police claim that he was armed? Why is there a person toward the end of the video who says, “Bakit niyo binaril, sir? Dapat kinapkapan niyo muna”?
Ngayong hinaharap natin itong krisis ng COVID-19, importanteng malinaw ang guidelines ng gobyerno, para naman hindi na dumagdag pa sa takot at kaguluhan ngayon. Kaya kailangan kong linawin ito—hindi pwedeng basta mang-aresto ang PNP dahil sa paglabag sa health emergency measures.
Sabi kasi ni NCRPO Regional Director Sinas, aarestuhin ng kapulisan yung mga lalabag sa ipapatupad na “community quarantine” sa Metro Manila. Hindi pupwede yan.
The PNP cannot arrest and detain you for violating public health emergency measures. Pwede ka nilang harangin at wag papasukin, na tama lang naman kung kailangan, pero hindi ka nila pwedeng arestuhin at ikulong dahil hindi naman krimen ang subukang pumasok sa Metro Manila.
Dahil nag-aalala ako para sa inyong lahat sa biglang pagdami ng kaso ng COVID-19 at sa nakikita nating pagresponde dito, heto ang kaunting payo mula sa isang concerned lolo:
Kung titingnan natin yung pag-handle ng ibang bansa sa sitwasyong ito, may dalawang lesson tayong makikita. First, we must radically change our behavior by practicing social distancing until the danger is over.
And second, we must convey to the government, in the strongest and loudest terms, that instead of downplaying the dangers of the coronavirus, it should take immediate steps to improve our public health system:
In light of the SC decision ordering the Solicitor General to release all documents related to the Drug War, the Free Legal Assistance Group (FLAG) will go on FB Live at 10am, to share its initial findings on the cases it has handled. #25ChelDiokno
After we filed our petition, there were oral arguments conducted by the Court. On December 5, the Court issued this resolution requiring the SolGen to submit the documents.
The SolGen did not immediately comply. Instead, he filed a motion for reconsideration.