Free the Morong 43!

Monday, 06 December 2010 04:22

Written by Tony La Viña

This week, on December 10, we celebrate Human Rights Day. It will also have been more than ten months since 43 health workers were rounded up by Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP) in Morong, Rizal, and detained on suspicion of being with the New People’s Army (NPA). Their case has attracted local and international attention, criticisms of illegal arrest falling on the AFP and the Philippine government, and calls for the release of the Morong 43 (now 45, as two of the detainees gave birth). To date, their case had been reviewed by the Justice Department, and Secretary Leila de Lima’s report is now with President Noynoy Aquino, awaiting action.

Whether by Executive action or Judicial review, it is my belief that there is legal basis for the release, preferably immediate, of the Morong 43. The health workers had been arrested under the wrong search warrant, which had been issued for a certain “Mario Condes” and who is not among the 43. The technical merits alone imply that the health workers cannot be detained under that search warrant, making the search and arrest illegal. Even the President has admitted this.

Another pressing reason to free the 43 is the right of any Filipino citizen to a speedy trial. Especially when they are accused of illegal possession of explosives and of membership in an insurgent group, the case of such an accused demands prompt attention and resolution, because what are involved are the suspect’s political rights and the safety of the state. Ten months is too long for such a case to linger in investigation or in court. This is also apart from humanitarian considerations for the elderly and the two mothers among the 43.

The point is that by now, if no good and concrete reason had been produced by the investigating authorities (the AFP, Philippine National Police (PNP), or the DOJ) to hold the Morong 43, then their detention cannot continue. Because their arrest is legally dubious at best, their continued imprisonment opens the AFP and the rest of government to criticism and loss of confidence, the latter of which is dangerous for effective governance.

Loss of confidence is also an issue surrounding the death of notable botanist Leonardo Co, who had been gathering specimens in Kalinga, Leyte when a firefight erupted between the military and rebels in the same area. While the AFP is still investigating along with the PNP, it has initially claimed that its soldiers were not the ones that shot at Co, but his family still has doubts. Co’s demise and the case of the 43 will only raise more question marks around the military institution. This is lamentable, because the AFP had been lauded by election observers for helping to ensure peaceful elections last May 10, proving that our military can be professional, effective, and dependable for Philippine democracy.

Benjamin Franklin once said that those who sacrifice essential liberty for temporary security deserve neither. The question is whether the two always have to be mutually exclusive and opposing, or can there be a proper balance of these two competing priorities. During Marcos’ time, the Philippines traded liberty for security and economic stability: worthwhile ends in themselves, but the surrender also opened doors for abuses by those in power, civilian and military alike. On a smaller scale, this question is also involved in the Morong 43 case (and to a lesser extent, Leonardo Co’s death).

Human rights should be integrated into Philippine domestic security policy. In our Supreme Court, it is integrated through habeas corpus, habeas data, and writ of amparo, that protect the lives and rights of individuals illegally threatened by the security services from disappearance, indefinite detention, torture, and murder. In this way, it enjoins the police and military to be more circumspect and professional in its operations, and deters their use for politically-motivated ends.

The AFP has made great strides in reform and professional development since the dark days of Martial Law. For the record, I know many people in the military, as well as the police, including quite a number who have been my students. I have only great admiration and respect for them. They love our country and sacrifice a lot for our people. They too have been victimized in the name of revolution or other political objective. But this is no excuse for the current situation. Great strides remain: resolving cases of disappearances, killings and “salvages”; curbing inhumane interrogation tactics; ensuring the accountability of anti-insurgency operations, especially intelligence operations; improving rules of engagement to minimize or avert collateral damage and civilian casualties.

Ultimately, the highest achievement the Philippine government can accomplish for security and liberty is the success of the peace process with the leftist insurgency and the MILF, and in improving governance in neglected, poverty-stricken corners of the country. These are long-term gains, involving continuing political commitment (and which also require a thoroughly professional Armed Forces and PNP; hence the importance of reform in these services). Today, though, the best short-term gain the AFP and the government can achieve in securing stability and liberty is to promptly resolve the Morong 43 and Leonardo Co cases, to dispel doubts and restore trust in our military. Security and liberty need not be mutually exclusive, when both are pursued by an enlightened leadership and a professional security service.

I certainly believe that President Benigno Aquino III is an enlightened leader. Remembering his own family's experience, I suppose the President empathize with the families of the Morong 43, especially now that the detainees are on hunger strike and Christmas nears.

As for me, without knowing anyone of the Morong 43, not aware of their ideological or political convictions, conscious only of our common humanity, I plead to the President: Free the Morong 43!

Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites