The defense against the complaints and charges of harassment have taken a certain shape in court this week, as the four embattled Cordilleran activists face off against the machine of the government in the court of law.
The democratic defense pitch is that without any concrete evidence tying harassment efforts against the activists to government agents, there cannot be a declaration that harassment is coming from state actors.
A followup pitch is that with the activists still able to walk and leave their homes without arrest, with them still able to voice their opposition to the government, that there is no repression, there is no suppression, and there are full rights in play.
The counter-pitch is that even without such concrete ties, it is self-evident where the threats emanate from; and that even the mere threat, the mere declaration of terrorist status is a non-physical form of endangerment and suppression.
Now, the courts must decide which viewpoints are valid and more worthy of consideration, a monumental task that surely requires objectivity, the rigor of law and logic, and the mercy and morality of justice.
While the courts decide where merit lies, it is upon us to extol the virtues of right and fairness. Baguio has declared itself a safe haven for counter-views and activism, a bastion of human rights and their defenders, and so while this case takes place in the halls of the Baguio Regional Trial Court and on Baguio soil, all parties are behooved to comply with this declaration.
Without a guilty verdict one way or the other, it would seem that the way forward is a status quo. No physical contact, therefore, no red card, no disqualification and expulsion from the pitch.
However, one side has already taken a stance by declaration of terrorist status, which, lawful or otherwise, poses dangers to the declared. As enemies of the state, they must now contend with the constant fear of elimination – a threat that does not need to materialize in order to pressure those under it.
Therefore it is incumbent upon the Baguio court to uphold its declaration, its nomenclature as the court of a safe haven for human rights, to ensure that these rights are upheld and due process is observed.
A linchpin of the complaint against the anti-terror effort is the lack of due process and transparency; the least that can be done is to promise the defendants all due process, all due transparency, and all due neutrality.
