How communist terrorists lump together with landgrabbers
FOLLOWING Governor Ito’s advice, I lodged a complaint with the Antipolo City Prosecutor’s Office of forcible entry against the armed intruders. It was very clear from the joint Sinumpaang Salaysay executed by my wife and myself that what we were complaining about was the forcible takeover of our property by these armed groups. I don’t know what happened but when the fiscal filed the information at the Antipolo City Municipal Trial Court for Cities, instead of the forcible takeover of our land being the subject of our criminal complaint, what was stated as grabbed by them was our house. So, each time the judge intervened with clarificatory questions to my sons and me during the trial as to whether we were prevented from coming in and out of our house, we answered no. And on that basis, the judge ruled that there was no forcible entry committed — on that basis, the judge finally paved the way for the landgrabbers to take over our property for keeps.
In criminal complaints, the complainant is not entitled to appeal.
One time I came upon this judicial ruling: When in doubt as to the wording in an information, the judge should revert to the body of the complaint. And, p **** ng**a naman, Judge, maliwanag sa aming Sinumpaang Salaysay, ang reklamo namin, landgrabbing, ibabanat ng piskal housegrabbing. ‘Di ba dapat nag-revert ka sa body of the complaint? Pero hindi, naging katsuwariwariwa ka ng piskal sa pagtimpla sa aming sakdal na landgrabbing upang maging housegrabbing. Para kanino ninyo ginawa ang pambabastardo sa batas, sa mang-aagaw ng lupa, hindi
It is the bastardization of democratic processes such as the above — wherein the politically powerless are rendered totally defenseless against powerful oppressors (in my case, Kuratong Baleleng generals, albeit hiding behind legal fronts) — that has largely contributed to the influx of poor folks to the communist terrorist insurgency. And it is in this respect that landgrabbing, as much as the communist terrorist rebellion must become a priority concern of the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA).
Section 4 of the ATA provides that terrorism is committed by any person who (among other categories of offenses): a) “Engages in acts intended to cause death and serious bodily injury to any person, or endangers a person’s life; b) “Engages in acts intended to cause extensive damage or destruction to a government or public facility, public place or private property (highlighting supplied).”
On letter a, twice this had been committed against my person. The first time was when the leader of the hired goons of the landgrabber attempted to hack me with a bolo but was prevented by the timely intervention of my son. The second time was when a former police officer, fronting for the Kuratong Baleleng generals, slammed my face with a piece of concrete hollow block and stabbed my son on the head with an ice pick.
Both occasions were marked by the landgrabber’s destruction of the iron fence of our compound. Upon final takeover of that portion of our property, the landgrabber tore down that fence and proceeded to cut down the trees in that portion — the bamboo trees, the all-too-precious now all-toorare Tipolo tree, guava, santol and mango trees — destroying the entire orchard nurtured by my wife.
Accessories to terrorism
In light of its applicability I perceive on the landgrabbing of my property, the ATA becomes truly magical. How a law specifically crafted to address mainly the insurgency problem of the country turns out to be a comprehensive formula for curing not just terroristic insurgencies but other long-festering ills of Philippine society, such as this landgrabbing in my case. Section 14 of the ATA states: “Section 14 – Accessory. Any person who, having knowledge of the commission of any of the crimes defined and penalized under Section 4 of this Act, without having participated therein takes part subsequent to its commission in any of the following manner: a) by profiting himself/herself or assisting the offender to profit by the effects of the crime; by concealing or destroying the body of the crime, or the effects, or instruments thereof in order to prevent its discovery; or c) by harboring or concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal or conspirator of the crime shall be liable as
JOHANNESBURG, South Africa: The UNAIDS 2020 Global AIDS Update gave us a clear indication why the world did not meet the fast-track targets by 2020: inequality, perpetuated by structural oppression such as gender inequality; economic disparity; including human rights abuses and violations. For most of us living in sub-Saharan Africa, we don’t need a report to tell us this. Our lives are a litany of inequality we know deep in our guts.
Inequality is growing for more than 70 percent of the global population, solidifying divisions and hampering economic and social development. Covid-19 is impacting the most people in vulnerable situations the hardest — even as vaccines for Covid-19 are becoming available, there is great evidence of inequality in accessing them.
Confronting inequalities and ending discrimination is critical to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals, a collection of 17 interlinked global goals designed to be a blueprint to achieve a better and more sustainable future for all. We have less than 10 years remaining to meet these goals.
The right to health is interconnected with other rights, such as the right to information, the right to freedom and security, the right to equality and nondiscrimination and the right to bodily autonomy.
Almost all these global goals are linked to important determinants of health therefore achieving them will impact the right to health for all.
We know that 2020 was a challenging year for many health systems across the globe from the highest level of national leadership to community-based health facilities. Because of Covid-19, human, financial and research resources have been diverted from other health programmes including HIV prevention, sexual and reproductive health and rights and gender-based violence services.
Unfortunately, this means that health systems in regions with high HIV rates are more susceptible to fragility. Sub-Saharan Africa is home to almost half the global population of people living with HIV. This makes the issue even more urgent. Covid-19, like HIV, is showing us what health systems lack in planning and resourcing.
In May 2020, a mathematical modelling group convened by UNAIDS and the World Health Organization (WHO) estimated that a six-month disruption to
HIV services could lead to an additional 500 000 deaths from AIDS-related illnesses (including tuberculosis) in subSaharan Africa in 2020–2021.
A six-month total disruption in these services was an extreme scenario and thankfully turned out to be less severe than feared. What this research did was to show us how vigilant we need to be about to HIV service disruptions and that the additional demands that Covid-19 has placed on health systems are real.
Covid-19 has shown the world that for many people across the globe, health is not simply a matter of individual health predispositions, but also a matter that is determined by economic and social conditions that influence the health of people and communities.
Inequality is the unfinished business of the AIDS, sexual and reproductive health and gender-based violence responses. Structural challenges are borne unfairly by individuals through differential access to healthcare. Socioeconomic and structural factors interact with each other to generate and reinforce negative health outcomes that disproportionately affect poor and people in vulnerable situations.
Accordingly, human rights must be the basis of solutions and policy that centres people in vulnerable situations who are often neglected from health services goods and facilities such as women, indigenous people, people of African descent, people with disabilities, older persons, people experiencing homelessness, migrants and refugees and key populations, that is, sex workers, people who use drugs, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender and gender-diverse people. These marginalized groups often lack access to HIV and other critical sexual and reproductive health, social protection and legal services.
It is important that we pay special attention to the role of laws, policies and practices that contribute to poor physical and mental health and in fuelling stigma against vulnerable people.
Every country in the world has at least one law that still criminalizes same-sex sexual relationships, sex work, personal drug use or HIV exposure and transmission.
There are some countries in sub-Saharan Africa that are pockets of excellence. We hear stories of heroic individuals or communities who have ensured that people have access to increase adherence to HIV treatment against all odds.
Many countries have implemented multimonth dispensing of antiretroviral medicines to three or six months, as recommended by the WHO.
But we do need successes to be much structural and far-reaching.
Comprehensive HIV management is an integral part of realizing sexual and reproductive health rights and is in line the state’s duty to respect, promote and fulfill the right to health. It is therefore incumbent on governments to repeal laws criminalizing HIV, non-disclosure, exposure, and transmission, as well as consensual sexual activities between adults and the criminalization of gender diversity, transgender identity or expression.
Sex work must be decriminalized and countries must prevent human rights violations of forced or coerced sterilization of HIV positive women.
In 2020, South Africa’s Commission for Gender Equality released a report that documents 48 cases where women were allegedly forced or coerced to undergo sterilization. There must be justice for such women, and we must prevent the occurrence of forced or coerced sterilization.
We must commit to the operationalization of the UNAIDS Rights in the time of Covid-19 report that calls on us to combat all forms of stigma and discrimination including those based on race, profession and those directed toward marginalized groups that prevent them from accessing care.
Ending inequality is the only way to achieve the right to health for all and it is everyone’s business to ensure that we do so.
Zero Discrimination Day is commemorated by the United Nations every year on 1 March. This year, the UN is highlighting the urgent need to take action to end the inequalities surrounding income, sex, age, health status, occupation, disability, sexual orientation, drug use, gender identity, race, class, ethnicity and religion that continue to persist around the world.
The views expressed herein are personal and do not necessarily reflect the views of the United Nations.
BAGUIO CITY: Members of the press here lashed out at the Regional Law Enforcement Coordinating Council (RLecc) for planning to impose what they described as a virtual gag on the media a la “tokhang” with the proposed implementation of a measure against left-leaning individuals as the plan will be a direct infringement on press freedom.
In a press statement, the Baguio Correspondents and Broadcasters Club (BCBC), the largest and oldest media organization in Northern Luzon, urged the Cordillera Regional Peace and Order Council to outrightly reject the plan against perceived leftists, including members of the media, because it will impede the performance of their duties and responsibilities as journalists.
The BCBC lauded Regional Director Romel Daguimol of the Commission
on Human Rights in the Cordillera for withdrawing his signature from a controversial RLecc resolution and for standing by the rights of the people to freedom of expression.
Earlier, the RLecc passed the resolution enjoining members of law-enforcement agencies, together with representatives of local government units, to conduct “tokhang” on known left-leaning personalities in the government, media and other entities.
The BCBC said the resolution has sent a chilling effect on those who believe in the freedom of expression and who still have faith in democracy.
According to the media organization, even the timing of the measure on the 35th anniversary of the EDSA Revolution (Feb. 21 to 25, 1986) is ironic as the word tokhang will never be forgotten by the families, friends, relatives and survivors of the government’s war on drugs that has been boasted by the Duterte administration as the ultimate solution to the drug menace and the drug trade in the country.
The Oplan: Tokhang used in the government’s war on drugs involved the visitation and knocking on doors of drug suspects as a warning for them to stop dealing and using drugs.
The BCBC said the use of “tokhang” sets up a dangerous precedent because it follows the same controversial procedures on the war against drugs that were a failure in stopping the drug trade and instead caused the death of thousands of individuals.
The media organization added that years have passed since tokhang was unleashed but drug addicts, drug addiction and the drug market still occupy the headlines.
The organization said it is unfortunate that the RLecc expects “tokhang” to be the answer to why there are many poor people, who are struggling against oppression and discrimination and other historical injustices.
“Whenever the media convey the people’s concerns, demands, desires and pleas to government bodies, they will be bombarded with legal actions and condemnations from the people, who are supposed to be standing by the provisions of the Constitution on the rights of every Filipino,” it added.
The BCBC reiterated that freedom is a fundamental constitutional right and that the media has the right to move freely without control of those in power and that such a role is a crucial indicator that the press is the fourth pillar of democracy.