|
|
|||||
| Prof. Jose Maria Sison at his office | |||||
|
INTERVIEW WITH PROF. JOSE MARIA SISON ON HIS OPPRESSION, PEOPLE'S WAR AND PEACE NEGOTIATIONS January 27, 2008
The interview was published by the Monthly Review in three parts.
|
|||||
 |
 |
 |
|||
| PART 1 | PART 2 | PART 3 | |||
 |
|||||
|
Prof. Jose Maria Sison carrying his personal belongings in a plastic sack upon his release from The Hague penitentiary on 13 September 2007 in The Netherlands. |
|||||
|
INTERVIEW WITH PROF. JOSE MARIA SISON ON HIS OPPRESSION, PEOPLE'S WAR AND PEACE NEGOTIATIONS
By Roselle Valerio Editor, Liberation International June 27, 2008
Thank you for agreeing to this interview. I intend to ask you questions about your legal and political situation, the people's war in the Philippines and the peace negotiations between the National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) and Government of the Republic of the Philippines (GRP).
Part I Interview
The Oppression of Prof. Jose Maria Sison
Q1: In what capacity do you answer my questions?
JMS: As a Filipino and as a member of humankind. As a student and teacher of political science. As the chief political consultant of the NDFP in peace negotiations with the GRP.
Q2: What about as the founding chairman of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP) or as the current chairman of the Central Committee of the CPP?
JMS: As founding chairperson of the CPP. That is a historical fact. I may be able to cite pertinent events in CPP history to shed light on current circumstances. The circumstances are clear that I cannot speak as the current chairman of the CPP Central Committee. My curriculum vitae is publicly available at the website of the International Network of Philippine Studies.
Q3: You were a target of the charge of subversion as the alleged CPP chairman in September 1988. A month after, this charge pushed you to seek political asylum in The Netherlands. Subsequently, the Philippine military authorities poured out more charges against you to oppose your asylum application. What became of those charges?
JMS: The subversion charge and other allegations against me were supplied by the Philippine government to the Dutch government upon the direction of the US government. Indeed, they were used to counter my application for asylum and residence even as the Raad van State, the highest Dutch administrative court ruled in 1992 and 1995 that I am a political refugee in accordance with the Refugee Convention. In its online bulletin the US State Department acknowledged that it used the Philippine government to intervene in my asylum case. And the Dutch government also openly declared that it was denying me asylum supposedly to maintain the credibility of its relations with allied governments.
All the false charges against me were politically-motivated and were used for psychological warfare in the mass media. The charge of subversion was the only one that was filed before a court in the Philippines. It was dismissed by the court in 1992 after the repeal of the oppressive Anti-Subversion Law. In principle, the CPP was supposed to have become legal in the Philippines. The charge of multiple murder in connection with the 1971 Plaza Miranda grenade attacks on the opposition party was finally dismissed by the prosecutors of Manila in 1994. In April 1998 the Philippine secretary of justice certified that there was no pending criminal case against me.
But the Dutch government had used the false charges to block my legal admission to The Netherlands as a refugee. It had given credence to all the false charges supplied by the Philippine government since the late 1980s. It also made its own false claim that I had contacts with so-called terrorist groups. It used the lie to buttress its argument that it denied me asylum supposedly in order to maintain the “credibility” of the Dutch state to its US and other allies. It never started any criminal investigation of its own false charge against me in the 1990s. The Dutch intelligence fabricated the charge against me and never acknowledged my meetings with Philippine government officials, bishops, academics, parliamentarians, labor leaders and all other kinds of respectable people from various countries.
Q4: It seemed like the Philippine authorities did not bother you any more with false charges from 1998 until sometime under the Arroyo regime. If I remember correctly, then President Ramos and Speaker de Venecia were urging you to visit the Philippines. Did the Philippine authorities ever stop exerting pressures or making threats against you? Please elaborate on the charges filed against you before prosecutors and courts during the time of Arroyo.
JMS: The Philippine authorities never stopped to throw false charges against me in the mass media, from the time of Aquino up to that of Arroyo. Indeed, no formal charge was being made against me before any court from late 1992 until 2006. But starting in 1999 there was a decision by Philippine authorities to have me assassinated in The Netherlands. I became aware of this in October 2000 only after two failed attempts had been made against me.
Since the second half of 2001, the Arroyo regime escalated false charges of rebellion and common crimes against me in military press releases and in complaints to prosecutors. In November 2001, Arroyo herself requested the US government to put me on its so-called terrorist list. Subsequently, the US government would put me on this list on 12 August 2002. Other governments would follow suit upon signals from the US government and the open lobbying of the Philippine government.
Each time that the NPA undertakes tactical offensives, I become the target of false charges in the press. The military and police investigators also include my name in formal complaints submitted to prosecutors. These have been done most systematically against me under Oplan Bantay Laya, especially since 2005 under the auspices of the Inter-Agency Legal Action Group (IALAG) directed by the national security adviser on behalf of Arroyo and her cabinet cluster on internal security.
The IALAG is the agency denounced by UN special rapporteur Philip Alston for trumping up charges to stigmatize opposition leaders as “enemies of the state” and to cause their detention. The IALAG is also used for covering up such human rights violations as extrajudicial killings and disappearances.
Q5: What else have the Philippine authorities under the Arroyo regime done against you?
No less than the national security adviser called for my assassination in a full cabinet meeting. The Philippine authorities headed by foreign secretary Alberto Romulo agreed with the Dutch authorities headed by Dutch justice minister Piet Hein Donner on 26 January 2005 to trump up criminal charges of murder by which I could be charged, arrested and detained and by which the legal protection I have from Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights could be circumvented.
The two governments agreed to accuse me for the 2003 and 2004 killings of two military assets, Romulo Kintanar and Arturo Tabara. Thus, the Dutch police started in 2006 to collect testimonies from false witnesses provided by the Philippine authorities. At the same time, in violation of my right against double jeopardy, the Philippine government included these killings as specifications in the formal charge of rebellion filed against me and 50 other opposition personalities before the Makati court in late February 2006.
In July 2007 the Philippine Supreme Court ordered the dismissal of the charge, nullified the supposed evidence and berated the prosecution for engaging in politically-motivated charges and prostituting its office. The Philippine authorities did not inform the Dutch authorities about the content of the February 2006 charge of rebellion and the July 2007 Supreme Court decision. They made fools of the Dutch authorities who proceeded to arrest and detain me on 28 August 2007. ►
|
Q6: How did you manage to get out of detention? What are the factors involved?
JMS: The first factor involved is the truth that I had nothing to do with the killing of Kintanar and Tabara and that the Dutch prosecution could not provide any direct evidence against me. The second factor is that my lawyers are highly competent and the courts that we have gone through can easily see the lack of prima facie evidence against me. The third factor is the widespread militant support that I have received from the people in the Philippines and in various countries. People in more than 20 countries demonstrated against Dutch embassies and consulates to demand my release and denounce the injustice done against me.
The District Court of The Hague decided on 13 September 2007 to release me for lack of evidence. In response to the appeal of the prosecution, the Court of Appeal decided on 3 October 2007 to uphold the earlier court decision on the lack of prima facie evidence and went further by pointing to the political context in which the charge is obviously politically motivated, the witnesses against me are unreliable and it is doubtful whether I can exercise my right to cross-examine witnesses. The examining judge which had allowed my arrest and the raids on 28 August 2007 terminated the preliminary investigation on 21 November 2007.
Q7: People cannot understand why after all the court decisions in your favor, the District Court of The Hague decided on 5 June 2008 to allow the prosecution to continue investigating you and possibly to indict you at some later date. Were the previous court decisions worthless? What is really the status of your case?
JMS: In its 5 June 2008 decision the District Court of The Hague upheld the previous court decisions and declared on its own that so far (as of 20 May 2008) there is no incriminating evidence against me. But it wrongly claimed that I had given up my demand to end the investigation and close the case against me because I demandedthat instead an investigation be thoroughly conducted against those involved in assassination attempts against me in 2000 and thereafter. In fact, my counsel Michiel Pestman pointed out to the court that the prosecution had previously wanted to extend the investigation only up to mid-June 2008.
The court also wrongly gave credence to the claims of the prosecution that out of 6.3 million items seized in the 28 August 2007 raids it still had to examine 1.3 million items and that the previous examining judge had allowed it to examine more witnesses. In fact, the examining judge closed the investigation because of the court decisions and the failure of the prosecution to come up with incriminating evidence. Normally, the case against me would have been dropped entirely. But certain political factors are at work.
Under the Dutch legal system, the prosecution is allowed to ask for an extension of investigation together with the police and even without the examining judge. It is given the benefit of a doubt that it might still be able to turn up incriminating evidence, after which it can go to court to ask for another examining judge and I am also supposed to get the chance to cross-examine the witnesses against me before both the defense and prosecution go to court for trial.
The prosecution announced in court that its decision could be expected before 1 December 2008. It also hinted that it is considering to shift the charge of murder under Dutch criminal law to a charge of war crimes under the Geneva Convention and crimes against humanity under the International Crimes Act because supposedly it is easier to prove command responsibility than direct personal responsibility in a murder charge.
Q8: You mention political considerations in the continuance of the investigation against you by the prosecution. What are these?
In the first place, the charge of inciting the murder of military assets in the Philippines is without factual and legal basis but is politically-motivated and is the result of a political deal between Philippine and Dutch authorities. It would also be a political decision for the Dutch authorities to shift from a charge of inciting murder to one of war crimes or crimes against humanity. They will have to recognize the political authority of the revolutionary forces as basis for demanding command responsibility. This is contrary to the constant position of the Philippine authorities that the revolutionary forces are merely their domestic police problem.
But I think that the clearest and strongest consideration of the Dutch authorities in making the false criminal charge of inciting murder is to have the pretext to arrest me and raid the offices of the NDF Information Bureau and NDFP Negotiating Panel and the homes of the panel members, consultants and staffers. Some of the papers and digital files seized from the raids have been used as basis for statements in the Dutch court decisions to the effect that I and other NDFP personnel in The Netherlands play a “prominent role” in the CPP and NPA. Such materials are in the possession of those raided because they are needed in the peace negotiations of the NDFP with the Philippine government (GRP).
The court decisions are favorable to me in so far as these established the lack of prima facie evidence and effected my release from detention relative to the murder charge. But they are now being used by the Council of the European Union to provide a false judicial basis for the serialized perpetuation of my name in the so-called terrorist list of the European Union. I am certain that the US, Dutch and Philippine governments are in cahoots in trumping up the false charge of terrorism and using it in the US-instigated global war of terror and state terrorism. These three governments had also worked together before to oppose my application for asylum.
Q9 Are you going to appeal the June 5 decision of the District Court of The Hague? Why did you demand that the investigation against you be ended and redirected against those involved in the assassination attempts against you? What are you doing regarding this?
JMS: My lawyer and I are studying the possibility of appealing the June 5 decision of the District Court of The Hague. We are also observing how the prosecution is proceeding.
We demanded that the prosecution investigate thoroughly and prosecute those involved in the assassination attempts against me. The Dutch prosecution and police themselves have made significant findings in 2007 and 2008 about these assassination attempts. These are in the BORSSOM file and include the testimonies of Jose Ramos, Gloria Jopson-Kintanar and Ruel Murakami and some documentary evidence.
But the prosecution made a decision not to prosecute those involved in the assassination attempts, supposedly because they have voluntarily withdrawn from these. It claims that there is no more crime to prosecute despite the criminal attempts on my person and life on Dutch territory. Thus I filed before the Dutch Court of Appeal on 12 June 2008 a complaint against the prosecution for failing to prosecute a criminal act.
Q10 Why are the Dutch authorities so relentless in using false charges to oppress you, deny you asylum and residence, stigmatize you as a terrorist, ban you from work, deprive you of the essential means of human existence and arrest and detain you?
JMS: The longrunning reason is to discredit, isolate and run me down or to discourage me from exercising my freedom of thought and expression against US and Dutch imperialism and their puppets in the Philippines. The more recent reasons are connected with the US-instigated global war of terror and the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations. Regarding these, the Philippine authorities and their imperialist masters have interrelated objectives.
Under the pretext of looking for evidence against me on the charge of inciting murder, the raids were conducted on the NDFP office and homes of the NDFP panel members, consultants and staffers as a larger fishing expedition in connection with the false charge of terrorism involved in my case against the Council of the European Union before the European Court in Luxembourg.
The US, Dutch, European and Philippine authorities are also collaborating to pressure the NDFP to capitulate to the GRP. They have made many declarations that the CPP, NPA and myself would be removed from the so-called terrorist list as soon as the NDFP capitulated to the GRP.###
First published in slightly edited form in http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/sison010708a.html
|
||||
 |
|||||
|
Prof. Jose Maria Sison before a painting on the people's war in the Philippines at the NDF Information Bureau in Utrecht, The Netherlands. |
|||||
|
Part II Interview
People's War in the Philippines
Q1: The Arroyo regime has vowed to destroy or reduce the CPP, NPA and NDFP to the inconsequential before she steps down in 2010? Is this possible?
JMS: The Arroyo regime is daydreaming about the impossible. History shows that the Marcos regime could not destroy the revolutionary forces with 14 years of fascist dictatorship when these were still far smaller and far weaker than now. Instead, they grew bigger and stronger. The objective conditions now have become far more favorable for the Filipino people and the revolutionary forces to wage armed revolution. The crisis of the world capitalist system and that of the semi-colonial and semi-feudal ruling system have become far worse than before.
The subjective forces of the revolution, such as the CPP, NPA and the NDFP, have overcome the grave errors of subjectivism and “Left” and Right opportunism through the Second Great Rectification Movement since 1992. They have thus been able to take advantage of the ever worsening crisis of the ruling system in order to gain strength and advance in response to the Filipino people's demand for revolutionary change against oppression and exploitation.
Q2: Will you describe briefly the crisis of the world capitalist system and the domestic ruling system? Haven't the policy of “free market” globalization brought about development and prosperity? Isn't it ideological nonsense for the revolutionary forces to continue the fight? Are not the revolutionary forces afraid of the “strong republic” line of Arroyo and the US-promoted war on terror?
JMS: It is Arroyo who is engaged in ideological nonsense by believing in the dogma of the “free market” against the reality of foreign monopoly capitalism, the comprador big bourgeoisie, the landlord class and corrupt politicians like her escalating the exploitation and oppression of the broad masses of the people. It is a matter of reality and urgent necessity for the people to wage the new democratic revolution for national liberation and democracy against the semi-colonial and semi-feudal system.
Neoliberal “free market” globalization has accelerated the concentration and centralization of capital in the hands of the monopoly bourgeoisie and has rapidly pressed down the incomes of the working people and more than 90 per cent of the countries. It has actually constricted the global market. For a while, this market contraction was concealed by the expansion of money supply and credit to finance consumption, cover trade and budgetary deficits and promote corporate speculation. Now, the US and other imperialist countries are in a severe economic and financial crisis, the worst since the Great Depression.
“Free market” globalization has prevented the Philippines from engaging in self-reliant comprehensive and well balanced socio-economic development. The Philippines has not undertaken national industrialization and land reform and has abandoned self-reliant food production. It has been victimized by policies of denationalization, liberalization of imperialist-controlled investment and trade, privatization of public assets and deregulation against the workers, women, children and the environment.
It has used huge amounts of foreign and local borrowings to cover trade and budgetary deficits. Now, there is a global credit crunch, a big drop in global demand for the raw material and semi-manufactured exports of the Philippines and the soaring prices of fuel, food and other imported necessities. The broad masses of the people are undergoing terrible suffering. They are protesting in increasing numbers and are clearly desirous of revolutionary change.
Q3: Will you describe briefly the status of the revolutionary forces? How near or far are the revolutionary forces from taking the central seat of power in Manila? Are not the people getting tired that after 40 years of people's war they have not yet seized power on a nationwide scale? How do the revolutionary forces measure success?
JMS: I think that the CPP, NPA, NDFP and other revolutionary forces are strong enough to be considered the most serious political challenge to the entire ruling system. Although the revolutionary forces are not yet about to seize power in Manila and take over the presidential palace, they have made outstanding achievements in forty years of armed revolution and can use these as the basis for making larger achievements. The achievements of the revolutionary forces are due to the participation and support of the people. The people cannot grow tired of their own achievements and accept the reign of greed and terror that victimizes them.
On the basis of my readings, let me cite the achievements of the revolutionary forces. The CPP has members in so many tens of thousands and exists in all regions and provinces of the country. It leads millions of people in the urban and rural areas. The NPA has thousands of rifles and operates in 120 to 130 guerrilla fronts, covering thousands of barangays in 15 regions, 70 provinces and 800 municipalities. It enjoys the support of millions of people and it can move freely in at least 90 per cent of Philippine territory. Through the local revolutionary organs of political power, the people's democratic government has supplanted the authority of the reactionary government in extensive areas.
The NDFP encompasses 17 revolutionary forces within its fold. These include the CPP, NPA, alliances like those of the Christians for National Liberation (CNL), Moro Resistance and Liberation Organization (MRLO), Mindanao hill tribes (LUMAD) and the Cordillera People's Democratic Front (CPDF) and the mass formations of the workers (KASAMA and RCTU), peasants (PKM), women (MAKIBAKA), youth (KM), teachers (KAGUMA), health workers (MASAPA), lawyers (LUMABAN), writers and artists (ARMAS), scientists and technologists (LAB) and government employees (KAWANI). The NDFP has effectively expanded the influence of the revolutionary forces in the Philippines and abroad.
Q4: You have explained well that the people and the revolutionary forces have achieved a lot over a protracted period of time. But do you see any indications that the CPP is seeking to accelerate the growth and advance of the revolution? Won't there be a great leap forward soon? If there are indications, will you point these out?
JMS: There can be no clearer indications than the statements of the CPP published in its website and the news reports of intensified NPA offensives. The CPP has been calling on the people and the NPA to intensify the people's war and bring it to a new and higher level by seizing the initiative and launching tactical offensives at a faster rate and on a wider scale.
What is foreseeable is that the people and the revolutionary forces will continue to frustrate and defeat Oplan Bantay Laya, bring about the maturation of the middle phase of the strategic defensive and pave the way for the advanced phase of this stage in the people's war. The middle phase of the strategic defensive is supposed to involve the development of platoons as strike forces of the guerrilla fronts and companies as the offensive units of the regional and eventually provincial commands of the NPA.
Making a great leap forward depends on the revolutionary determination and capabilities of the revolutionary forces of the people and the rapid worsening of the crisis of the ruling system. There is no doubt that the people are sick and tired of the rotten ruling system and are desirous of revolutionary change. The stage of the strategic defensive in the people's war has taken such a long time but the succeeding stages of the strategic stalemate and strategic offensive can be comparatively much shorter.
Q5: What is the CPP trying to do in order to enhance its leadership and accelerate the advance of the Philippine revolution? What is the CPP doing to make sure that significant advances are made?
JMS: Relying on my background, presume that the CPP has to undertake ideological, political and organizational work in order to strengthen itself, realize the revolutionary leadership of the working class and accelerate the advance of the Philippine revolution. The Philippine revolution would be indestructible and would continue to advance so long as the CPP engages in Marxist-Leninist-Maoist ideological building, pursues the general political line of people's democratic revolution through people's war and follows the principle of democratic centralism in organizational building among the toiling masses of workers and peasants mainly and among people in the middle social strata secondarily.
The CPP is publicly known to have an organizational and educational plan to increase its membership into hundreds of thousands, who have the Marxist-Leninist-Maoist stand, viewpoint and method in thinking and acting, who are in the revolutionary mass movement and who are prompt in recruiting to the CPP |
the most advanced mass activists. The CPP is strengthening itself at all levels. It seeks to be deeply rooted among the masses at the lowest level. It is strengthening itself at the village, section and district levels to further develop the mass base for people's war. It aims to to strengthen itself at the provincial and regional levels in order to maximize its ability to lead and coordinate the use of NPA units from the guerrilla fronts for more frequent tactical offensives on the scale of a province or a region.
Q6: What is the NPA trying do to advance the revolutionary armed struggle? Are there new developments in this regard?
JMS: The NPA is a fighting, propaganda, productive and cultural force. It has long been the main organization of the CPP not only for defeating the armed counterrevolution in military terms but also for arousing, organizing and mobilizing the people in various aspects, politico-military, socio-economic and cultural. Under the leadership of the CPP, the NPA has encouraged the formation of mass organizations and organs of political power and the carrying out of the land reform campaign and other campaigns socially beneficial to the people.
The NPA integrates revolutionary armed struggle, land reform and mass base building in carrying out people's war. According to CPP publications, the guerrilla fronts will be increased from the level of more than 120 to 173 in order to have a guerrilla front in every congressional district in the rural provinces. There will be more frequent tactical offensives involving platoons, oversized platoons and companies. There will also be well-calculated head blows against the chieftains and centers of the armed counterrrevolution. Both CPP and NPA statements have been making these announcements.
Q7: Is there any new development in the politico-military strategy and tactics of the NPA? Anything new in terms formation and deployment, targeting, tactics and technique?
JMS: It is a matter of public knowledge that the CPP and NPA continue to pursue the strategic line of protracted people's war, encircling the cities from the countryside over a protracted period of time until the people's army has gained enough strength to seize the cities and take power on a nationwide scale. In the meantime, the NPA is waging an intensive and extensive guerrilla warfare on the basis of an ever widening and deepening mass base. It is conscious of a probability course in which guerrilla warfare is the main form of warfare in the strategic defensive, giving rise to regular mobile warfare in the strategic stalemate and further developing into a more widespread regular mobile warfare of larger forces, with elements of regular warfare and mass uprisings, in the strategic offensive.
In the present phase of the strategic defensive, the NPA is increasingly using platoons, oversized platoons and company-sized tactical offensives to annihilate or disarm enemy units through ambuscades and raids. At the same time, small NPA units are being used for various offensive purposes, including sniping, punitive actions, arrest operations, , seizing arms and sabotage. Carried out often and on a wide scale, these can weaken, demoralize and force the reactionary armed forces to commit serious mistakes.
According to CPP publications, the NPA gives the highest priority to the tactics of wiping out its armed opponents and capturing their weapons as well as impeding their operations by attacking their depots and lines of fuel, communications and food supply. The NPA also gives high priority to the dismantling of the operations of mining, plantation, logging for export and other enterprises which grab the land from the people , plunder the natural resources and ruin the environment. The NPA targets those entities most notorious for human rights violations, corruption, narco-trafficking and other serious anti-social crimes.
Despite military superiority for its strategic offensive, Oplan Bantay Laya has failed to destroy the NPA because this is a people's army that uses the major tactics of concentration to attack an enemy unit it can defeat, shifting to evade a superior enemy force and dispersal to do mass work or to deprive the enemy of any visible target. The forces of the NPA can use the tactics of concentration, shifting and dispersal because they enjoy the people' participation and support in the armed revolution. They develop their tactics and technique because they learn lessons from the onslaughts of the enemy forces and seize weapons and other kinds of equipment from them.
Q8 : Is there any effort to advance the agrarian revolution from the long running minimum land reform? What is the response of the revolutionary movement to the scoffing statement that it is not at all interested in making the tiller the owner of the land he tills?
JMS: According to CPP publications, the NPA is still carrying out of land reform the minimum program of reducing land rent and interest rates and raising farm wages, prices at farm gate and production in agriculture and sideline occupations. But the NPA is ever ready to carry out wherever possible the maximum program of enabling the tillers to take over the land at no financial cost to them. It has long been experienced in confiscating land from the despotic landlords and causing the restitution of land grabbed from the peasants and indigenous people. But this time it is determined more than ever to dismantle or disable large estates owned by corporations and landlord families and pave the way for the landless tillers to take over the land.
The reformists have carped that the reactionary government's Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program is truly meant to deliver land ownership to the tillers, unlike the minimum land reform program of the revolutionary movement. But the CARP has spent more money on the upkeep of the bureaucracy of the Department of Agrarian Reform than on the tokenistic amount of overpriced land sold by the landlords for supposed redistribution. The CARP allows the big landowners and agri-coprorations all tricks to prevent genuine land reform. These include the the plain refusal of the landlords to sell land, overpricing of the land, reclassication of the land, the stock distribution option, pure and simple landgrabbing and so on.
Q9: Is there anything new concerning building the mass base?
JMS: According to CPP publications, the CPP looks forward to the emergence of stable base areas as a result of the merging and development of the guerrilla fronts as bulwarks of the revolution in politico-military, socio-economic and cultural terms. The stable base areas can emerge as the product of the integrated advances of the revolutionary armed struggle, agrarian revolution and mass base building.
With regard to mass base-building, the CPP and NPA are striving to consolidate and expand the revolutionary mass organizations, strengthen the organs of political power and form the committees for carrying out campaigns of mass organizing, public education, land reform, defense, health, arbitration and cultural upliftment. The system of justice is being improved. The people's militia and self-defense units are trained to do local security work, support the NPA and stand as the reserve force. The people's militia units are the revolutionary police and can run into tens of thousands of members. The self-defense units based in the mass organizations can easily run into hundreds of thousands.
Q10: What role does the united front or the NDFP play in advancing the revolution? Why is it that up to now the broad united front has not yet ousted the Arroyo regime? What is the relationship of the united front for armed struggle and the united front for legal struggle?
JMS: The policy and tactics of the united front play an important and decisive role in the development of the people's democratic revolution. They serve to amplify the strength of the revolutionary movement, win over allies and mobilize many more millions of people in order to isolate and destroy the enemy of the people at every given time. The National Democratic Front of the Philippines (NDFP) is the most consolidated united front organization of the patriotic and progressive forces that are committed to armed revolution for national liberation and democracy.
You better ask those involved in the broad legal united front to oust the Arroyo regime. I believe that there are favorable conditions for this broad legal united front to achieve its objective. It is up to the main forces to find out what needs to be done in order to bring out hundreds of thousands and then millions of people to the streets on a nationwide scale and persuade the military and bureaucracy to withdraw support from Arroyo.
The success of the broad legal united front to oust the Arroyo regime will not topple the ruling system but will involve some gain of strength among the legal progressive forces and will serve to encourage the people's war. But if the broad legal united front fails to oust the Arroyo regime, the broad masses of the Filipino people will find it more necessary than ever to place their hopes on the armed revolution and to regard the CPP, NPA and the NDFP as their most reliable and most effective instruments for overthrowing the entire reactionary ruling system. ###
First published in slightly edited form in http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/sison010708b.html
|
||||
 |
|||||
|
NDFP Chief Political Consultant Prof. Jose Maria Sison (seated second from the left), at the signing the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL) in The Hague, The Netherlands in 1998. |
|||||
|
Part III Interview
GRP-NDFP Peace Negotiations
Q1: What is the position of the NDFP on the question of resuming the formal talks in the peace negotiations with the GRP? What is the key step towards overcoming all the impediments?
JMS: The NDFP is always ready to resume the formal talks in the peace negotiations with the GRP in accordance with The Hague Joint Declaration and subsequent agreements, especially the Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG), the Joint Agreement on the Formation, Sequence and Operationalization of the Reciprocal Working Committees (Joint Agreement on RWCs), the Comprehensive Agreement on Respect for Human Rights and International Humanitarian Law (CARHRIHL) and the Oslo Joint Statements I and II.
The NDFP and GRP must address the roots of the armed conflict through negotiations and agreements on economic, social, political and constitutional reforms in accordance with the agenda and methods set by The Hague Joint Declaration and the Joint Agreement on RWCs. The two negotiating parties and their principals succeeded in forging the CARHRIHL. If they muster the needed political will, they can make the comprehensive agreements on social and economic reforms (SER), on political and constitutional reforms (PCR) and on the end of hostilities and disposition of forces (EHDF).
Q2: Why does the NDFP consider as impediment the demand of the GRP for a permanent or indefinite ceasefire? The NDFP calls this an impermissible precondition. But is not the NDFP making its own preconditions.
JMS: The GRP demand for a permanent or indefinite ceasefire as precondition to the resumption of formal talks is an impediment because it violates The Hague Joint Declaration which stipulates that there shall be no precondition whatsoever which negates the inherent character and purpose of the peace negotiations. Supplanting the peace negotiations on substantive issues with ceasefire negotiations simply to pacify the revolutionary forces is a blatant violation of The Hague Joint Declaration. The GRP is seeking a ceasefire agreement that kills the negotiations on the substantive agenda of economic, social and political reforms. The issue of ending the armed hostilities is the fourth and last item of the agenda.
Unlike the GRP, the NDFP is not setting any precondition. It is simply telling the GRP to comply with the agreements that it has signed with the NDFP. What is the point in negotiating with the GRP if it can refuse to comply with agreements already made and even violate these so flagrantly. What the GRP cannot win in the battlefield, it seeks to win across the table by pushing a permanent or indefinite ceasefire that amounts to the pacification and capitulation of the revolutionary forces and the people and therefore the end of the peace negotiations without any substantive agreement on basic reforms.
Q3: It has long been bruited about that the NDFP has set as precondition to the resumption of formal talks the removal of the names of the CPP, NPA and yourself from the US list of terrorists so called. How true is this? What exactly is possible and acceptable to the NDFP by way of overcoming the “terror” list as an impediment to peace negotiations? How are Oslo Joint Statements I and II related to the question of “terrorist” listing?
JMS: Since the last week of November 2001 the NDFP has known for a fact from then Speaker Jose de Venecia that it was the Arroyo regime that had requested the US to list the CPP, NPA and myself as so-called terrorists. It should be necessary and appropriate for the GRP to request the US to delist the CPP, NPA and myself for the sake of promoting the peace negotiations. But shamelessly the Arroyo regime has declared that it is the sovereign right of the US to impose its political and legal categories and presumptions on Philippine events that are strictly within the jurisdiction of the sovereign Filipino people.
Knowing the extent of puppetry of the Arroyo regime to the US, the NDFP has frankly told the GRP several times that the NDFP cannot expect a puppet regime to tell its imperialist master to delist the CPP, NPA and myself. Instead, the NDFP has proposed that the GRP and NDFP sign together a declaration upholding national sovereignty and territorial integrity against foreign interference in the internal affairs of the Philippines. The Hague Joint Declaration declares national sovereignty as one of the mutually acceptable principles guiding the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations.
The Oslo Joint Statements I and II call on the GRP to be proactive in seeking the delisting of the CPP, NPA and myself. But the GRP has consistently said that it is the sovereign right of the US to interfere in Philippine affairs and that the way out of the “terrorist” list of the US and other foreign governments is for the CPP, NPA and NDFP to capitulate and submit themselves to a sham peace accord, that is obviously drafted by the US Central Intelligence Agency and its Philippine assets like executive secretary General Eduardo Ermita and national security adviser Norberto Gonzales.
Q4. Do you consider the US and the Arroyo regime as the biggest impediments to the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations? How do you propose to overcome US military intervention and the US-instigated war on terror, the human rights violations under Oplan Bantay Laya and the false charges in the “legal offensive” under the Inter-Agency Legal Assistance Group (IALAG), including the charge of rebellion, multiple murder in Leyte and the current charge against you of inducing the murder of Kintanar and Tabara?
JMS: Indeed, the biggest impediments are the US and the Arroyo regime itself. At the highest level, these have agreed on unleashing US military intervention in line with the US global war of terror. This has taken the form of Oplan Bantay Laya I and II and has resulted in gross and systematic human rights violations of the worst proportions since the Marcos fascist dictatorship. Progressive legal activists have not been spared from extrajudicial killings, disappearances, torture and false charges to stigmatize and imprison them.
The state terrorism that is going on in the Philippines is a matter of policy taken at the highest level on the GRP side upon the instigation of the US. Arroyo cannot be expected to change policy and course. She still daydreams that she can destroy the armed revolution or inflict a strategic defeat on it before she steps down or is ousted. She is in fact compelling and challenging the revolutionary forces and people to intensify the armed revolution. Her appointment of General Esperon as presidential advisor on the peace process is widely regarded as a provocation for the furtherance of the civil war in the Philippines.
The advocates of just peace and human rights in the Philippines and abroad have done well in exposing the gross and systematic human rights violations of the Arroyo regime. The UN special rapporteur Philip Alston has pointed out that the extrajudicial killings and disappearances are connected with the design of the “counter-insurgency” scheme and has called for the abolition of IALAG. It would be good if the GRP-NDFP Joint Monitoring Committee can function fully in accordance with CARHRIHL and the JMC Operating Guidelines.
It is fine that the Supreme Court has ordered the dismissal of the rebellion charge against me and 50 other opposition leaders. But IALAG continues to oppress opposition leaders, including myself, with trumped up murder charges in Leyte and elsewhere. The tentacles of the IALAG have also reached The Netherlands. I continue to face the false charges of inducing the murder of military assets like Kintanar and Tabara.
Q5. What led to the suspension of the JASIG by the GRP? Was the GRP justified in suspending it? How do you overcome the suspension of JASIG and the use of the list of holders of documents of identification (DOI) as wanted list, the murders, disappearances and imprisonment of NDFP consultants?
|
JMS: At one point in the second half of 2004, the NDFP postponed the formal talks in order to give the GRP the chance to comply with the Oslo Joint Statements I and II, regarding the “terrorist” listing. The GRP reacted by “suspending” the JASIG. The provisions of the JASIG do not allow “suspension”. They allow only either continuing validity or termination after a 30-day notice in advance. The NDFP's position is that JASIG remains valid and binding in effect in the absence of any notice of termination.
The real and malicious intent of the Arroyo regime in the illegal suspension of the JASIG became indubitably clear when it converted the list of holders of NDFP documents of identification into a manhunt list (with a great deal of guessing the real identities behind the alternative names). At any rate, the manhunt list resulted in the murder, disappearance, torture, arbitrary imprisonment and grave threats to NDFP consultants and staffers.
To resume the formal talks, the GRP needs to declare unconditionally the continuing validity and effectivity of the JASIG. The negotiators, consultants and staffers must be assured of safety and immunity guarantees. The GRP must give an accurate account of those NDFP consultants and staffers who have been victimized by the illegal suspension of the JASIG. Justice must be rendered for the benefit of the victims. Those who have violated their human rights must be held to account under the JASIG, CARHRIHL and pertinent laws.
Q6. In what way does the Anti-Terrorism Law impede the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations? What will happen to the peace negotiations if the Supreme Court recognizes its validity and allows its operationalization?
JMS: Should it be considered valid by the Supreme Court and operationalized by the GRP executive, the Anti-Terrorism Law (alias Human Security Act of 2007) would certainly kill the GRP-NDFP peace negotiations once and for all. The floodgates to human rights violations would open to an extent and in a manner as to outstrip the Marcos fascist dictatorship. The Anti-Terrorism Law is a license for unbridled fascism.
Even without the Anti-Terrorism Law, gross and systematic human rights violations have been perpetrated. They would certainly become more rampant if the Anti-Terrorism Law were allowed. In the course of their constant struggle for power, the rival reactionary groups themselves would not be safe from the overbroad and vague definition of terrorism and from its draconian punitive measures.
It is fine that constitutional questions have been raised before the Supreme Court by a broad range of highly responsible associations and institutions. Many people expect the Supreme Court to invalidate the Anti-Terrorism Law as entirely unconstitutional. Like the Anti-Subversion Law of the past, the Anti-Terrorism Law would not discourage but would inflame the armed revolution against oppression and exploitation.
Q7. According to some reports, the Arroyo regime used for electioneering purposes in 2004 the money recovered from the Swiss bank account of Marcos. How can the victims of human rights violations under the martial rule of Marcos be indemnified after the reported misappropriation and squandering of the money by the Arroyo regime? In what way is the failure to indemnify the victims an impediment to the resumption of formal talks? How can this be overcome?
JMS: There are indeed reliable reports that the Arroyo regime misappropriated and squandered the money intended to indemnify the victims of human rights violations under the Marcos fascist dictatorship. At the same time, the GRP Negotiating Panel informed the NDFP Negotiating Panel in 2004 that such money was still available if a law would be enacted to amend the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Law. But every year the Arroyo-controlled Congress fails to pass that amendatory law.
The GRP has to indemnify the aforesaid victims, who were winners in the human rights litigation against Marcos in the US. The indemnification is in accordance with CARHRIHL. Continuing failure to indemnify the victims exposes the bad faith of the GRP in co-signing agreements with the NDFP. It shows that the GRP has utter disregard for human rights and for rendering any measure of justice to the victims of human right violations. As soon as possible, the GRP should negotiate and agree with the representatives of the victims.
Q8. What can be done to overcome the prolonged failure of the Arroyo regime to fulfill its promise to release political prisoners in 2001 and 2004?
JMS: This is a matter of the GRP keeping its word in order to build good will and confidence. In comparison to the Ramos regime, the Arroyo regime has promised so little to show a measure of goodwill to the political prisoners but has failed to deliver. Some of those political prisoners who were supposed to be released in 2001 and 2004 are still in prison. Others have won their freedom through difficult legal struggle.
Instead of undertaking goodwill and confidence-building measures, the Arroyo regime has gone into an orgy of human rights violations under Oplan Bantay Laya I and II. After taking over the peace negotiations on the side of the GRP, fascists like Generals Reyes and Ermita and longtime CIA asset like Norberto Gonzales have merely used the illusion of peace negotiations as one of the minor tactics in their vain attempts to deceive the people and destroy the armed revolution through sheer military force.
Q9. How do you evaluate the localized peace talks and offers of amnesty and rehabiltation as well as the payment for weapons surrendered?
JMS: Real peace negotiations between two conflicting forces like the GRP and NDFP can be carried out only through negotiating panels created and directed by their respective principals who ultimately sign and approve the comprehensive agreements on economic, social and political reforms. The Arroyo regime has maliciously used so-called localized peace talks and offers of amnesty and rehabilitation and payments for arms surrendered in a futile attempt to supplant the negotiations at the proper level, deceive the people and split the ranks of the revolutionaries.
The GRP has long failed in these tactics. In so-called localized peace talks, the GRP talks with a handful of renegades and its own underlings and therefore with its own shadow for psywar purposes. The offers of amnesty are not believed because those who make the mistake of taking the bait are soon murdered by death squads of the regime. To pocket the money for themselves, corrupt military officers and bureaucrats collude in drawing up the lists of ghost beneficiaries of amnesty, rehabilitation and rewards for the surrender of arms.
Q10. What are the chances for resuming the peace negotiations while Arroyo is still in power?
JMS: It is doubtful whether the formal talks can be resumed while Arroyo is still in power. That is because the Arroyo regime is not making any move to meet the demands of the NDFP for doing away with the impediments that the GRP has put up. The impediments can be overcome if analyzed one by one and if what is just and reasonable is aimed at within the framework of The Hague Joint Declaration and the succeeding agreements.
The NDFP is willing to go further into exploratory talks towards overcoming the impediments and resuming the formal talks. If these exploratory talks do not lead to formal talks during the Arroyo regime, they can probably lead to formal talks during the next regime. In this regard, good sense and energy will not be wasted. At the same time, reality beyond the negotiating table does not stand still. The crisis of the ruling system is ever worsening. And the revolutionary forces of the people are growing in strength and advancing.###
First published in slightly edited form in http://mrzine.monthlyreview.org/sison010708c.html
|
||||
|
►
Send us your feedback
◄
/p
|
|||||
