Written for IFEX
Reflecting on events from the first half of 2021, IFEX’s Asia and Pacific Editor explains how recent massive citizen protests and pushback against Asia’s digital authoritarians can provide lessons on what we need to do to support the region’s pro-democracy movements and human rights campaigns.
Published by Bayan Metro Manila
After passing the Terror Bill which President Rodrigo Duterte recently signed into law, Congress voted to reject the franchise application of ABS-CBN.
Duterte is the chief executioner spreading hate, fear, divisiveness, and misery in the country; but Congress proved to be a willing partner in legitimizing the suppression of civil liberties.
Duterte and Congress exploited the distraction and disruption caused by the COVID-19 pandemic in maneuvering the hasty passage of measures that undermine constitutionally-guaranteed rights and freedoms.
The Terror Law represents the biggest threat because of its draconian provisions which could outrightly criminalize all forms of dissent.
Meanwhile, shutting down the country’s largest TV and radio broadcaster is part of a sinister plot to run roughshod over citizens demanding accountability from the government.
For Duterte and his cabal, enforcing a brutal legal instrument will be hindered if there is consistent public scrutiny. Media coverage could put into spotlight the human rights abuses and other excesses committed by state forces. Thus, the rejection of ABS CBN’s franchise bid. ‘Kill’ ABS-CBN and create a chilling effect in the media sector.
Dictators and press freedom cannot co-exist peacefully. The dictator Duterte is on a rampage convicting critical journalists, attacking independent media, and shutting down a major broadcaster.
It is infuriating that instead of performing checks and balances in the government, Congress is abetting the rise of authoritarianism. These legislators willfully betrayed their constituents by promoting Duterte’s nefarious agenda at the expense of the people’s right to information. They will face voter backlash and people’s outrage for their decision to switch off a major symbol of media freedom in the country.
We have no recourse other than to continue resisting tyranny whether in the courts or in the streets. We will continue to defend free speech in offline and online spaces. We will defy Duterte’s terror regime. The people will prevail. Laban kapamilya!
Written for The Diplomat
Election protests have shaped Philippine politics for the past three decades and there are signs that the upcoming 2022 presidential elections will be similarly divisive.
In 1986, the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos was accused of rigging a snap presidential election. A protest walkout by election computer programmers drew sympathy from the public and members of the armed forces, which eventually led to the ouster of Marcos through a peaceful People Power uprising.
Presidential Election Campaign Kicks Off in the Philippines
Written for The Diplomat
The three-month election campaign in the Philippines is set to start tomorrow amid a continuing pandemic scare and doubts over the legal eligibility of a leading presidential candidate.
There are 10 presidential candidates, nine vice-presidential candidates, 64 senatorial aspirants, and 177 party-list groups. In the Philippines, the president and vice president are elected separately. Only 12 senators will be declared winners. Party-list groups with 2 percent of votes will automatically get one seat in Congress. Local elections for more than 18,000 positions will be held at the same time.
There are 65.7 million domestic voters and around 1.8 million overseas voters. The national and local elections are scheduled for May 9.
In the 1990s we asked, what if members of the Leftist Democratic Alliance (DA) were allowed to serve their full term as Congress representatives in 1946? What could have been its impact on Philippine politics? We could only speculate an answer at that time but perhaps a better insight is possible now by studying the experience of Leftist partylist groups that entered Congress in 1998.
This is the 20th year since Bayan Muna topped the partylist election which was held a few months after the historic Edsa Dos. The significance of this cannot be overlooked. My generation and those that preceded us were politicized with the Left serving as mere spectators of congressional intramurals. But a new generation of activists has since emerged which already saw the Left’s partylist work in Congress as part and parcel of Philippine politics.
Perhaps the passage of the partylist law in 1995 will be cited by scholars for paving the way for the Left’s entry in Congress. But what really enabled this to happen was the rectification movement which coincided with the Ramos era. Without this, the Left would not have reinvigorated itself which allowed it to participate in mainstream elections.
The rectification movement was primarily an education campaign that affirmed the Left’s national democratic orientation; and this included a review of what transpired in the 1980s such as the boycott error and the Partido ng Bayan experience.
Before 2001, the Left’s attitude towards elections was summed up by highlighting the deleterious consequences of the boycott decision. What is often ignored by analysts is the Left’s decision to form an electoral party and field candidates in the 1987 election. The loss was traumatic in terms of the violence inflicted on volunteers and candidates. It was a grim reminder of the Left’s critique of the bourgeois-controlled, fraud-prone, and violent electoral system which influenced how progressive forces would situate themselves during election cycles in the next decade.
The rectification movement provided an opportunity to build ideological unity which boosted the strength of mass organizations and their confidence to pursue bolder political initiatives. It is this context that informed the actions of the Left when it rallied the people in Edsa Dos and its subsequent successful participation in the partylist elections.
Bayan Muna made history in 2001 and its victory inspired the formation of sector-based partylist groups in 2004 and 2007.
So, what did the Left achieve after two decades of dabbling in electoral struggle?
Researchers can make an independent quantitative review of the Left’s output in Congress. They can confirm that the Left has been consistently prolific in terms of the bills, resolutions, and speeches produced by its representatives. The laws it authored are neither parochial nor Palace-sponsored. Contrary to state propaganda, the records would also show that Leftist legislators voted in favor of most measures endorsed by the government. It reserved its strongest opposition to blatantly anti-people and anti-poor legislation, and every Malacanang maneuver to undermine checks and balances.
It dutifully served the role of an opposition force guided by its principles and program of action while bridging the agenda of the other parliament, the parliament of the streets.
It is the real minority, but a minority within a minority. An opposition bloc that cannot be swayed by pork barrel allocation, bureaucratic perks, evil corporate lobbying, and even prosecution based on trumped-up cases.
It is lacking in numbers that matter – money for patronage and members to constitute a majority bloc. But it thrived because it has the numbers that really matter – a growing electoral base, engaged constituency, and a credible track record of public service.
For a political force known for challenging unjust laws, its members are surprisingly among the most behaved in Batasan. After two decades, no Leftist legislator has been ejected from the plenary for causing a ruckus or engaging in a fistfight. The Left can’t be lumped with other notorious absentee and tardy members of the House of Representatives.
When reports allege that Leftist solons are involved in supposedly unethical transactions, these refer to the political activities of partylist groups. Reactionary politicians and pundits are not impressed with the Left’s performance in Congress because what they seek to control is the political influence of the movement. They assumed that the Left’s comprehensive outlook in politics will be modified by the default blinders in a conservative institution like Congress. They wanted the Left to abandon its vision for a holistic social transformation in favor of congress-dependent reformism.
The Left is harshly judged for refusing to conform to what the ruling classes expected it to perform. Thus, its dissent inside Congress is demonized while its political organizing is deemed criminal.
The Left is incapable of being correct in the eyes of its rivals. It is extremely radical for the status quo defenders but its legislative work is also suspect for those who disdain engagement with traditional political forces. Leftist electoral parties cannot endorse mainstream candidates without eliciting accusations of cooptation and opportunism.
Yet it is members of the Left who have been targeted by state-backed terrorism.
The Left is cautious in enumerating its achievements in Congress since it might provoke another wave of aggression. It is also sensitive to speculative denunciation that its work in government institutions triggered the rise of despots like Gloria Arroyo and Rodrigo Duterte.
I can never be a disinterested chronicler of how the Left conducted its political work inside Congress and its impact on the struggle for national democracy. There is a time for everything including being summoned by History to testify about the roles we played in the people’s resistance.
The challenge today is how we mobilize and push back against attempts to disenfranchise voters and outlaw Leftist partylist groups. It is part of the bigger fight against the tyranny of Duterte.
It is easy to imagine a Congress without the Left, but are we sure this is the end goal? When DA members were expelled from Congress in 1946, the exploiting classes quickly maneuvered to pass anti-people laws, which led to the plunder and devastation of Philippine economy. We need to recall the link of what was done to DA and the sinister motive of pro-imperialist forces in order to fully understand the real intent of the incumbent government in their aggressive push for the ouster of Leftists in Congress.
Published by The Diplomat
The year 2021 saw Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte make a series of dramatic political flip-flops that characterize his final year in office. Meanwhile, several women have earned national and international recognition for their advocacy and achievements amid the pandemic and rising authoritarianism.
Why are Schools Still Closed in the Philippines?
Published by The Diplomat
Schools in the Philippines have remained closed since March 2020 due to President Rodrigo Duterte’s insistence that sending students back to campuses is a risk he cannot take during the pandemic.
Duterte first rejected the proposal of the Department of Education (Deped) to reopen schools in December 2020 by citing the surge of COVID-19 cases linked to the Alpha variant. At that time, malls and cockfighting arenas had already been allowed to resume operations.
Published by Bayan Metro Manila
We are not surprised that President Rodrigo Duterte has signed the Terror Bill into law.
He is the same leader who brutalized communities with Tokhang, Martial Law in Mindanao, and all-out-war against the communist movement.
He is remorseless for the widespread human rights abuses under his watch. He is intolerant of dissent. He is afraid of rising public anger over the health crisis and the economic recession. His only solution is to spread fear and deter citizens from expressing their sentiments.
Duterte thinks he can survive the remaining two years of his term by signing the Terror Law. He underestimates the people’s outrage.
The rise of a broad opposition in the past month against the draconian bill spells doom for the repressive Duterte government. It reflects growing frustration over Duterte’s leadership, his indifference to the plight of ordinary citizens, his militarist approach in dealing with the pandemic, and his pro-business bias in responding to the recession.
We are ready to level up the resistance as we link arms with all Filipinos who are already exasperated with the fascist and callous Duterte government.
We will also not forget the legislators who voted in favor of the Terror Bill. They are complicit in legitimizing Duterte’s authoritarian regime. They will get their comeuppance come election time. Their names will be shamed for giving this government Martial Law powers in the guise of combatting terrorism.
We challenge the legislators who rejected the bill to join the people in calling for the junking of the law. Stand with the protesters and defend the right to free expression.
We ask our local leaders to be more critical instead of blindly enforcing Duterte’s anti-people policies and programs.
The fight is not over even after the signing of the Terror Law. There are court battles to win, legislators who must be made accountable, human rights violators who must face trial, Palace apologists and cohorts spreading disinformation who need to be exposed, plunderers and fascists who must be punished, and Duterte, the monster-in-chief, who deserves to be ousted for his crimes against the people. The people will prevail. Laban!
April 2021: COVID-19 surges, obstructions to information, coup violence, media convictions, and satire. Addressing India’s COVID-19 surge is made more difficult by authorities censoring information. Myanmar’s junta has resorted to publishing wanted lists, targeting journalists. A satirical playlist led to the brief incarceration of an artist in Malaysia. And Hong Kong’s first conviction around a violent attack during the 2019 protests? An investigative reporter. Read more
May 2021: India’s new digital rules and crackdowns surge in Hong Kong, Cambodia, and Myanmar. The month of May saw the further deterioration of free speech in Hong Kong, Cambodia, and Myanmar. Amid the pandemic surge, India is engaged in a legal battle with tech companies and civil society about its new IT rules. But there were also some victories to inspire us, including the landmark legislation for the protection of journalists in Pakistan’s Sindh province, and Mongolia’s new law for the protection of human rights defenders – the first of its kind in Asia. Read more
June 2021: The demise of press freedom in Hong Kong, Pakistan journalists attacked, and a case against Twitter. The closure of a pro-democracy newspaper after it was raided by the police signals the demise of press freedom in Hong Kong. Pakistani media are alarmed over attacks targeting journalists. Several investigative journalists and Twitter were charged by Indian authorities over a viral video. Read more
The fun of being in an echo chamber ends the moment we realize it distorts our knowledge of the world. It could take some time and a lot of reflection before we recognize how our online experience is filtered by biases which could prevent us from making good use of the power of the web. We might even think of the bubble as a safe space that reinvigorates our spirit amid the decay in our offline relations. The internet has many uses and one thing it conveniently offers is the boosting of individualism while rebranding it as a platform of empowerment. It poses unique challenges for community building and the pursuit of activism.
Any internet user would find it useful to connect with those who share his or her views and they can mine the web for evidence, memes, and links reinforcing their beliefs. Overwhelmed with googled data, it becomes easier to ignore contrary perspectives. The pleasure of confirming what we know is more appealing than verifying information that appears on our newsfeed. We think we are gaming the system by identifying the tyranny of the algorithm but our digital footprint exposes the user who thrives in the ‘ako chamber’.
What are its features? The spotlight is always the self. A commentary begins and ends with the self. Memes for self-promotion are disguised as a template of dissent. The world wide web is tweaked to make it appear that it is a puny space obsessed with the whims of an individual. How many harbor the illusion that reality in the virtual is triggered by our log-in activities and vanishes the moment we put down our screens?
Anonymity is trivialized as the refuge of the wicked. Yet, the right to be anonymous has fueled the rise of powerful collectives. The internet itself became possible through the linking of networks. The digital infrastructure is a legacy of shared enterprise only to be commandeered by tech entrepreneurs and influencers. Admittedly, the visible self is a more credible profile compared to bots and mindless cyber armies polluting the web. If this empowers individuals and allows them to name what is wrong in the present with the hope of changing the future, then this should be set as our standard when we go online.
But what if the focus on the self does not go beyond the self-serving presentation and the real aspiration consists of nothing more than projecting a spectacle that claims to offer a deeper meaning? When does amplifying our relevance ends so we can begin mentioning the Project, the Cause, the Event? The internet lures us to be enamored with our voice that we tend to forget how advancing an agenda without drowning other voices is possible, and even desirable.
Self-aggrandizement is normalized internet behavior and this alters our perception and methods of doing politics. We adopt tools and develop habits that aim to generate metrics validating visibility, attention, and audience engagement. Political impact is equated with virality. Trends are concocted via sensational hashtags mobilizing individuals to crowdsource a campaign.
There are outstanding examples of how online activism produces a real impact in communities, especially if bureaucracies are persuaded to implement reforms. However, these successes are hard to replicate. Convincing internet users to do more that can disrupt the dynamics of power is even more difficult. Indeed, the influencer wannabes might ask: Why should they persist with others if as individuals they have already made their point? And what’s the use of collaborations if these will blur their unique contributions?
What kind of politics will survive if it’s reformatted into what is viable on social media? It isn’t enough to combine online and offline formulas. We should probe the assumptions that underpin this so-called new type of political organizing. We have to emphasize that not all our activities should end up in a meme, hashtag, category, or trend. The reach of politics cannot be reduced into something that can be counted or predicted by artificial intelligence. Our work is not to inflate attention especially to ourselves and echo what is already known and popular. It is often or it should be about the relentless struggle to define and fight on behalf of what is unnamable, uncategorizable, and even a taboo in the present.
It is a painstaking learning and unlearning process that will take time before results are known. It can never be an ephemeral trend that can appear and disappear but made no difference in the lives of many. It is certainly not about building an army of influencers whose excessive love of self is anathema to our notion of making democracy work for everybody. It eschews selfish individualism and superstar syndrome in favor of an ethic promoting less of self for the emergence of selfless empowered individuals who diligently connect with others in order to build multiple networks of resistance.
Written for The Diplomat
All eyes are on the presidential candidates who will compete in the 2022 Philippine elections, one of whom will succeed President Rodrigo Duterte and lead a government battered by pandemic and economic woes. Also important is the battle for the vice presidency, a position elected separately from the president: the winner will not just become a de facto contender for the 2028 elections but will also become a significant political figure who may choose to play a crucial role in deciding what will happen to Duterte after the end of his term.
Why are Former Philippine Presidents Running for Lower-Level Posts?
Written for The Diplomat
Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s announcement that he is amenable to being considered as a vice presidential candidate in the 2022 elections has ignited fierce debates on whether it is permissible under the 1987 Constitution, which limits presidents to a single six-year term in office.
This matter will be resolved late this year if Duterte pushes through with his candidacy, which is expected to be challenged in the Supreme Court.
Published by Bayan Metro Manila
On 8 May 2020, Major General Debold Sinas celebrated his birthday with a ‘mañanita’ organized by his subordinates at the National Capital Region Police Office. Sinas claimed that a ‘mañanita’ is a police tradition involving an early morning serenade for the chief who is celebrating his birthday. Sinas’ ‘mañanita’ was widely condemned for violating COVID-19 protocols and for displaying utter insensitivity to the plight of many Filipinos who are reeling from the disruption caused by the pandemic lockdown.
The image of Sinas gleefully welcoming his gang in the early morning led us to recall how his deployment as NCRPO chief in October 2019 immediately resulted in human rights violations targeting activists in Manila.
Two weeks after his appointment, his team conducted a series of raids which led to the arrests of leaders and community organizers of Bayan Metro Manila based on planted evidence and trumped-up charges.
All the raids were done early in the morning with Sinas describing these as successful police operations.
The infamous May ‘mañanita’ was organized for the ‘extraordinary celebration’ of Sinas’ birthday.
Were the October and November raids meant to welcome the appointment of Sinas as NCRPO chief?
His ‘mañanita’ as top cop of Metro Manila?
Sinas gained notoriety in his previous assignment in Negros where he was accused of terrorizing peasant communities and persecuting activist groups.
It is more than a coincidence that what greeted his entry to Manila mirrored his dubious legacy in Negros.
It was Sinas announcing his arrival in the country’s main region by raiding activist offices, arresting leaders of people’s organizations, and demonizing dissenters. It was a tactic straight from the fascist playbook with an unapologetic Sinas leading the crackdown in Manila.
Sinas’ penchant for power and intolerance of dissent led to the incarceration of five of our comrades from Gabriela, Kilusang Mayo Uno, and Kadamay.
One of the victims was Reina Mae “Ina” Asis Nasino, a former student leader at Eulogio “Amang” Rodriguez Institute of Science and Technology (EARIST). At the time of her arrest, Ina was based in Tondo as a community organizer of Kadamay. She was actively campaigning for the rights and welfare of the urban poor in Smokey Mountain when the police raided the Bayan Manila office and fabricated evidence against her and two other activists.
Ina was pregnant at the time of her arrest. She is now eight months pregnant confined in the crowded female dormitory of the Manila City Jail.
Her mother is one of the petitioners who asked the Supreme Court to release Ina and 21 other political prisoners on humanitarian grounds.
Ina’s continuing detention is unjust. She did nothing criminal other than fighting for the empowerment of the poor.
The prison condition at Manila City Jail poses a health risk for her and her unborn baby. She needs regular pre-natal check-up and hospitalization for the safe delivery of her baby.
We call for her immediate release. The charges against her should be dropped and she should be allowed to experience motherhood without being subjected to inhumane state persecution.
We enjoin the public to support Ina’s fight for justice. We should not allow Duterte and his power-hungry enforcers in the police and military to misuse the law and their position to attack activists and other critics of the state.
Let us welcome Ina’s baby to the world by vowing to campaign for the freedom of Ina and all political prisoners.