The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) has concluded its nationwide dialogue with government officials, experts and individuals on issues involving red-tagging, the practice of law enforcement and intelligence agencies to label a person or organization as communist or terrorist.
In a statement, the CHR said its final dialogue was held last March 24 with the participation of several key govenment officials to assess the practices and patterns associated with red-tagging and their possible human rights consequences.
Thereafter, the CHR is expected to come out with its recommendations on the red-tagging issue in the country and what assistance the government would give to victims.
During its natiowide dialogue that started in July 2024, the CHR also invited victims of red-tagging to share their substantive inputs based on their experiences.
The dialogue is called “Public Inquiry on the Current Situation of Human Rights Defenders (HRDs) with Focus on Incidents of Red-Tagging." The CHR said its main goal is to broach the topic of red-tagging across all relevant sectors by employing a non-adversarial approach.
"Let me remind everyone that this public hearing is dialogic and not adversarial. We reaffirm our steadfast commitment to engage in a meaningful discussion and information-sharing on red-tagging and public accountability,” CHR Chairperson Richard Palpal-latoc said.
Last year, the Supreme Court declared that red-tagging, vilification, labelling, and guilt by association threaten a person’s right to life, liberty or security and may justify the issuance of the court’s protective order through the Writ of Amparo.
A Writ of Amparo “is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity.”
In its decision, the SC declared:
“Red-tagging has been acknowledged by international organizations as a form of harassment and intimidation. As early as 2007, the United Nations Human Rights Council observed the prevalence of a practice in the Philippines where groups at the left of the political spectrum are characterized as front organizations of anti-democratic groups. The report called the practice ‘vilification,’ ‘labelling,’ or guilt by association.
“More than a decade after, red-tagging also transitioned to online social media platforms like Facebook. As noted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in its Annual Report dated 29 June 2020, labelling certain groups or persons as ‘reds’ oftentimes came with frequent surveillance and direct harassment.
“Some received death threats either through text or online direct messages. A number of women activists have reported being threatened with rape or other forms of sexual assault. While some of these red-labelling remained as threats, the report also noted that some of those red-tagged individuals were eventually killed.
“Just last year, various United Nations special rapporteurs made a public plea to stop the practice of red-tagging in the country, stating: ‘Human rights defenders in the Philippines continue to be red-tagged, labelled as 'terrorists' and ultimately killed in attempts to silence them and delegitimize their human rights work. This must end.’"
The CHR said that during the dialogues, members of the 6th Commission en banc (full commission), including Commissioners Beda A. Epres, Faydah Maniri Dumarpa, retired justice Monina Arevalo Zenarosa , and retired judge Maria Amifaith S. Fider-Reyes , took part in the exchange with government representatives to discuss the issue of red-tagging.
It said some of the issues they tackled included the role of government agencies in supporting victims of red-tagging, the legal basis for various initiatives and projects to address the issue, and the importance of employing evidence-based approaches.
“Grounded in our mandate to gather information on human rights violations and abuses, the Commission carried out the proceedings with a balanced approach -- ensuring transparency while safeguarding the security and well-being of participating stakeholders," Palpal-latoc said.
He said the perspectives shared by government representatives helped provide insight as the CHR formulated recommendations for all relevant stakeholders to effectively address red-tagging.
He also said that stakeholders participation was a key factor in crafting mechanisms that seek to protect and promote the rights of every Filipino.
He added: “The CHR conducts this discourse to (1) understand the concept of red-tagging from the perspective of all sectors of society and know what the government is doing to address this, (2) to determine the acts or practices constituting red-tagging or red-baiting and the corresponding systemic pattern of violation of human rights, (3) to surface existing accountability measures against perpetrators of human rights violations, and (4) to recommend other possible redress mechanisms for victims of human rights violations due to red-tagging or red-baiting."