(FILE) Young New People聮s Army (NPA) rebels stand in formation during the recent anniversary of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) in a town in Misamis Oriental province on Dec. 26, 2016. (Jigger J. Jerusalem)
MANILA, Philippines鈥揂 Manila court has dismissed the government鈥檚 petition to declare the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) and its armed wing, the New People鈥檚 Army (NPA), as a terrorist organization.
The government filed the proscription petition through the Department of Justice (DOJ) in 2018 based on Section 17 of Republic Act 9372 or the Human Security Act of 2007. If granted, it hoped to seek clearance from the Court of Appeals for wiretapping, freezing, and viewing bank accounts of CPP-NPA leaders and members.
With the Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) of 2020, the HSA is repealed. The ATA tagged six CPP leaders as terrorists.
READ: PH terror council tags 6 Reds, 5 others as terrorists
In denying the government鈥檚 case, Manila Regional Trial Court Presiding Judge Marlo Magdoza-Malgar said the CPP-NPA was not organized for terrorism.
鈥淲hile the armed struggle with the violence that necessarily accompanies it is indubitably the approved means to achieve the CPP-NPA鈥檚 purpose, means is not synonymous with purpose. Stated otherwise, armed struggle is only a means to achieve the CPP鈥檚 purpose; it is not the purpose of the creation of the CPP,鈥� part of the court鈥檚 135-page ruling said.
CPP鈥檚 10-point plans of action, the court said, 鈥渁re reasonable aspirations of any civilized society.鈥�
Included in the 10-point program are the following:
鈥� Fight for national unity and democratic rights
鈥� upholding the principle of democratic centralism,
鈥� solving the land problem,
鈥� carrying out national industrialization,
鈥� promoting national scientific and mass culture,
鈥� respecting the right to self-determination of the Bangsamoro and other national minorities and adopting an active and independent foreign policy.
A reminder that communist groups should be called terrorists, the DOJ pointed out atrocities the CPP-NPA allegedly committed.
Of the incidents mentioned, the court has confined the scope of its assessment to nine incidents, including the following:
鈥� the December 31, 2019, killing of Bontola Mansinugdan in Agusan del Sur;
鈥� killings in 2019 and three separate 2020 killings in Surigao del Sur;
鈥� the May 2020 burning of a chapel and residential houses in Misamis Oriental and
鈥� the July 2020 killing of Datu Saidor Balansi in Cagayan de Oro City.
The government witnesses identified the perpetrators as NPA members based on their clothing, an all-black ensemble, and firearms.
鈥淐ertainly, it takes more than a certain manner or mode of dressing to establish that one is a member of the CPP-NPA,鈥� the court said adding that unless there is evidence to show that an all-black ensemble is the official uniform of the CPP-NPA, it cannot consider the witnesses鈥� identification.
In terms of firearms, the court said the nine incidents occurred in Mindanao, 鈥渢eeming with armed rebel groups鈥搕he MNLF, MILF, Abu Sayyaf, Maute Group and a scattering of brigands who may also be known to carry firearms.鈥�
The court said the nine incidents were confined to particular places in Mindanao.
鈥淎ny fear and panic these incidents may have caused are confined to the communities where they have occurred,鈥� the court said adding that it has not reached the 鈥渨idespread and 鈥渆xtraordinary鈥� proportions contemplated under the law.
鈥淧erhaps contributing to the low impact of the foregoing atrocities is the CPP-NPA鈥檚 chosen battle strategy which is guerrilla warfare within the context of a protracted people鈥檚 war,鈥� it said, adding that 鈥渢he nine incidents of atrocities fall within the category of small-time 鈥渉it and run鈥� attacks and sporadic acts of violence with no specified victims or targets.鈥�
The court said the government could also not present evidence to prove that the nine incidents in Mindanao were committed on the orders of the communist leadership.
It added that the government has also failed to establish that the nine incidents were committed to coerce the government to give in to demand.
鈥淓ven if one assumes that these incidents have managed to hold the government鈥檚 attention, the petitioner鈥檚 evidence has yet to establish that these incidents were meant to coerce the government to give in to the perpetrator鈥檚 demand. More particularly, it remains to be shown that immediately prior to, contemporaneous with or immediately after, the commission of the 鈥渢errorist acts鈥� the CPP or the NPA has made any 鈥渄emand鈥� to the government,鈥� the court said.
It added that the government failed to support its argument that the attacks were meant to force the government to engage in peace talks to prevent more bloodshed.
鈥淓ven if such demand is assumed to be an implicit motive of these disparate incidents, still, it can hardly be said that a demand for peace negotiation is an unlawful demand.A demand for peace negotiation or peace talk or cessation of hostilities, is on its face, a valid lawful demand,鈥� the court added.
The court said only one of the incidents cited by the government closely fits as a 鈥渢errorist attack鈥� is the . But it happened before the HSA, so it couldn鈥檛 be used against CPP-NPA.
鈥淐lassifying these acts as 鈥渢errorist acts鈥� that will in turn classify the CPP-NPA as terrorist organization would lead the Court to tread on the constitutionally-infirm ground- that of applying provisions of a penal law to acts committed prior to the law鈥檚 enactment,鈥� the court said.
Initially, 600 names were in the government鈥檚 proscription petition but the plea was amended several times until the names were trimmed down to less than 20.
RELATED STORIES:
ATC 鈥榙esignates鈥� CPP-NPA as terrorist organizations
600 鈥榯errorists鈥� stricken off revised DOJ petition vs Reds
Court orders DOJ to summon Joma Sison over CPP-NPA case