2 pastors, 1 lay leader ask SC protection against red-tagging | Inquirer News

2 pastors, 1 lay leader ask SC protection against red-tagging

/ 07:55 PM November 28, 2022

2 pastors, one lay leader ask SC protection against red-tagging

INQUIRER FILE PHOTO

MANILA, Philippines — Two pastors and a lay leader of the United Church of Christ in the Philippines (UCCP) on Monday asked the Supreme Court (SC) for protection against troops from the 59th Infantry Battalion who red-tagged them as communist supporters.

UCCP pastors Edwin and Julieta Egar and lay leader Ronald Ramos, a former barangay captain, in a writ of Amparo petition, told SC that members of the 59th IB continue to threaten to violate their right to life, liberty, and security as well as their families.

Article continues after this advertisement

Petitioners said the troops “gravely coerced” them to “surrender” and admit to being part of the New People’s Army (NPA) despite a lack of evidence.

FEATURED STORIES

They added that there existed an “outright threat of a military operation” against them based on various text messages sent to them.

Last October 31, Ramos and Edwin said they were approached by men who introduced themselves as members of the 59th IB troops, accused them of being members of the NPA, and told them to surrender. Another attempt was made a day after. The troops also told them to join the mass surrender on November 3.

Article continues after this advertisement

On November 2, Ramos said he started receiving a series of text messages saying they would search his home where firearms and explosives would be planted in a “one-time big-time” operation. Another message said he would be killed in a fabricated shootout.

Article continues after this advertisement

Meanwhile, Edwin and Julieta were also subjected to surveillance and harassment.

Article continues after this advertisement

“Due to this illegal military surveillance, unwarranted visits, threats of illegal searches, and the outright threat of a deadly military operation akin to the Bloody Sunday operations, the respondents officers and enlisted personnel of the 59th IB have implanted genuine and crippling fear in the minds of petitioners,” read the 62-page petition.

They added that they now live in fear, “wondering whether tomorrow will be their last. They have also yet to be able to return to their homes for fear that instead of presiding in a safe haven, they would be endangering themselves more by being open targets for the Respondents officers and enlisted personnel of the 59th IB.”

Article continues after this advertisement

Named respondents are the following: Armed Forces Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Bartolome Vicente Bacarro, Philippine Army Commending General Lt. Gen. Romeo Brawner Jr., Commanding officer of the 2nd Infantry Division of the Philippine Army Maj. Gen. Roberto Capulong, 59th IB commander Lt. Col. Ernesto Teneza Jr., and enlisted men of the battalion.

The petitioners seek a temporary protection order from the Supreme Court against the respondents. They also asked the SC to issue a production order for the respondents to produce any documents or evidence relevant to the case.

For permanent relief, they urged the SC to make permanent the protection order and order the chain of command to conduct an investigation to identify those responsible for violating the rights of the petitioners.

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our daily newsletter

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

Writ of Amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty, and security has been violated or threatened. Like a writ of habeas data, it serves a preventive and curative role in curbing extrajudicial killings and enforced disappearances.

RELATED STORIES:

Gov’t responding to criticisms, including red-tagging, is essence of democracy

Red-tagging: It’s like ‘living with a target on your head’

JMS
TAGS: red-tagging, Supreme Court

Your subscription could not be saved. Please try again.
Your subscription has been successful.

Subscribe to our newsletter!

By providing an email address. I agree to the Terms of Use and acknowledge that I have read the Privacy Policy.

© Copyright 1997-2024 INQUIRER.net | All Rights Reserved

This is an information message

We use cookies to enhance your experience. By continuing, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn more here.