The color that causes the bleed matches the color that bleeds.
In the game of excluding the democratic processes and reducing the voices of the masses, red-tagging is the main weapon of oppressors to stun progressive individuals, journalists, and certain groups who are amplifying their advocacies to call for a better government system. With no solid legal backbone, the majority are forced into silence. But not until the highest judicial body declared a ruling that would change the trajectory between the red-taggers and their vulnerable victims.
On May 8, 2024, the Supreme Court (SC) released a decision to define red-tagging as a threat to life, liberty, and security. The ruling was derived from the petition filed by Siegfred Deduro, an activist and former representative of the Bayan Muna party-list. This was after Deduro claimed that military officers blatantly accused him of being part of notorious communist groups.
Silencing Dissent
According to a documented report by the National Union of Journalists of the Philippines (NUJP), there have been at least 159 red-tagging incidents against individual journalists, newsrooms, and media organizations since 2016. Over half of these incidents are state-sponsored, one reason these acts persist in the country is that the administration is the one fanning the flames.
Prior to the landmark decision of the Supreme Court, the Constitution only had a limited ability to provide legal support for the victims of red-tagging. Filipinos could only seek recourse through the Writ of Amparo when their safety and freedom were jeopardized.
However, before the ruling, the writ can be considered a vague legal bandage for the red-tagging prey. While threats to life, liberty, and security are also covered, the specificity of red-tagging as a form of threat is not explicitly captured under the Amparo.
A Landmark Decision
The decision of the Supreme Court to finally give a concrete definition to red-tagging is a major step for the organizations and people who are endlessly fighting to stop this horrendous act that causes nothing but harm, abuse, and constant violation of human rights. With the current state of our political landscape, it is time for the highest court of the land to offer judicial strength to those people who have been overthrown by the red-taggings.
With this, a strong judicial system is born that will protect us from the distinct repercussions of red-tagging. The released ruling will also ease the citizens’ fear to bravely call for action when necessary. Without any red-tagging silencer, our voices will be heard even in marginalized communities and in places that do not have access to information.
For advocates and progressives, this goes beyond acknowledgment from the Supreme Court; it represents a guiding light finally shedding upon them. It signifies that, after many years, a significant government body is seeing the realities behind red-tagging.
Protecting Filipino Voices
The Supreme Court's recognition of red-tagging has profound legal implications, particularly for journalists and student activists, who are often targets of such tactics. This ruling signifies a crucial acknowledgment of the dangers faced by these groups and the need for legal protection against such threats.
For journalists, this declaration reinforces the importance of safeguarding press freedom, as red-tagging leads to quiet censorship in the field, particularly for those working for major broadcasting companies. The fear of compromising their job security and personal safety causes them to be cautious and strive for neutrality in their reporting. While we may desire to see courageous and unfiltered news presenters, achieving this is nearly impossible under the current administration.
Similarly, for student activists, the recognition underscores the need to protect their rights and safety in advocating for their beliefs. Those from the state universities and colleges (SUCs) are the rampant victims of red-tagging. The ongoing stigma that the majority of the student activists are “namumundok,” or alleged insurgents, is just an example of the adverse impact caused by the red-tagging which causes a bad image for the academic institutions affected.
The Road Ahead
We need to understand that red-tagging is not a mere accusation of people being part of communist groups. It is a phenomenon that is happening in our country in which innocent people are targeted by the state and the private sector causing them harm, putting their reputation at risk, and worse, being killed. It will not stop in the blink of an eye, but this huge step taken by the Supreme Court is a needed progress in eliminating the dangers of red-tagging.
In the realm of legislation, since it is solely a categorical pronouncement made by the Supreme Court, it is still vital for the relevant institutions to do their part to help criminalize red tagging. Laddering the ruling made by the SC, lawmakers should reach their full power to make red-tagging a constitutional crime.
With this action by the Supreme Court, we anticipate it will catalyze shielding Filipinos from the dangers posed by red-tagging. It is a disgrace to the nation's integrity to exploit one of the colors of the Filipino flag and integrate it to lead to abuse and target innocent individuals.
With all the silenced hands now chained, let us break free from those restraints. Together, let us raise our arms and collectively erase the red paint on the Philippine lands.
Article: James Justin Capistrano
Cartoon: Kaiser Aaron Caya
Комментарии