An all women protest led by Philwomen on ASEAN was held today in Manila on the opening of the 30th ASEAN Summit. The protestors raised human rights concerns and held ASEAN governments accountable for the domino effect on women's rights and people's rights of the pursuits of neoliberal economic policies. International delegates from ACSC/APF joined the action after a short dialogue with governments earlier today and a press conference.
2017 May Day - Workers Solidarity Long Live!India is facing a severe employment crisis. It is estimated that given the number of youth entering the work force, the Indian economy needs to generate between 1.2 and 1.5 crore jobs every year. Research indicates that the economy creates less than 10% of this number each year. For example, according to the Government’s own data, in the first half of 2016, in employment intensive sectors such as textiles, leather, gems and jewellery, metals and automobiles only 1.68 lakh jobs were created.But this is not a new trend. Even in the six year period when the Indian economy had its highest growth rates (2004-2010), only 2.7 crore jobs were created, a shortfall of 4.5 crore jobs. Not only are there no jobs, but most of it is informal, contractual and in the unorganised sector. According to official data, only 35% of the jobs created in the manufacturing sector between 1989 and 2010 were in the formal sector. This trend has worsened in the past seven years. Jobless growth, informalisation and the repression of workers and trade unions (such as in the recent Maruti Suzuki case) are the result and requirements of the intense competition brought by India’s steady integration into the global economy. In several sectors, India’s trade policy has contributed to this.India’s flawed trade policyThe entry of foreign products (manufacturing and agriculture), services and companies investing in India intensified since the country’s neo-liberal reforms of 1991. The impact of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) that India became a member of in 1995 and various FTAs that it signed later, further deepened the liberalisation of the economy. Since 2000, India has signed nine FTAs with countries such as Japan, Malaysia, Singapore, South Korea, Sri Lanka, and Thailand, as well as with the 10 countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). All these FTAs were negotiated in secrecy with little discussion in the Parliament or involvement of State Governments.Have the WTO and FTAs led to loss of jobs?Yes, both the WTO and FTAs have contributed to destroying jobs and even entire sectors. For example:
- By 2005, India completely eliminated import duties on 200 computer and electronic products due to WTO commitments. This led to massive imports and the decimation of the indigenous hardware industry and a shift from manufacturing to merely assembling these products. In consequence, lakhs of jobs were lost. The subsequent job opportunities were mostly informal in nature for less skilled assembly operations.
- In 2014-15, India’s steel imports increased by 71% due to reduced import duties as a result of the South Korea and Japan FTAs, leading to lower production and loss of jobs.
Yet, despite these negative trends, India is now negotiating a mega-regional FTA - the 16 nation Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).What is the RCEP?The RCEP is an FTA that aims to simultaneously pry open markets in 16 Asian countries; the 10 ASEAN countries (Brunei, Cambodia, Indonesia, Malaysia, Myanmar, Singapore, Thailand, Philippines, Laos and Vietnam) plus Australia, China, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and India. These countries account for 30% of global trade, and 50% of the world’s population. If it is signed, RCEP will create the world’s largest free trade area.The RCEP is a broad agreement that covers many aspects of the economy, such as trade in agricultural products, industrial goods (including medicines), services, foreign investment, competition policy, intellectual property rules, and the digital economy amongst others. Despite 5 years of negotiations, there are still many areas of disagreement between the 16 countries involved. However, there is a concerted push to conclude the deal by 2017.Why should Indian workers be worried about RCEP?In order to protect domestic production from imports, countries use import duties. RCEP requires member countries to drastically reduce import duties to between 0 and 3%. Compared to other countries in RCEP, India has higher import duties, at an average of 10% for goods and 32.5% for agricultural products. This reduction of duties would also apply to India’s trade with China, as a member of RCEP. India has a large trade deficit (INR 3.45 lakh crores in 2015-16) with China, which will increase after RCEP. Companies producing steel and heavy machinery have already raised the concern that this would lead to displacing of local manufacturing by Chinese imports. Pressure on these sectors due to increased imports will lead to management decreasing wages, using contract work and retrenching workers. Sectors such as garment, ceramics and electronics will also face negative impacts due to cheaper Chinese imports. RCEP will allow e-commerce giants such as Alibaba to sell freely in the country, thereby threatening local products and job creation.On the other hand, the Government is claiming that RCEP will bring gains in some sectors, but it will only be for a small creamy layer of professionals in the information technology (IT) sector. Ironically, IT companies are already retrenching jobs in India, such as Tata Consultancy Services’ retrenchment of several thousand workers in 2014 and the recent case of Cognizant Technology Solutions. Further, countries such as Australia and New Zealand have enacted policies that restrict visas for Indian IT professionals. China, Malaysia, Indonesia and Philippines are developing their own IT industries and will be reticent to open their markets for Indian professionals.RCEP clauses will put limitations on the policies that governments can impose on foreign investors, including labour laws and wages. RCEP also includes a mechanism called the Investor-State Dispute Settlement Mechanism (ISDS) that allow foreign companies to challenge policies and judicial decisions in secret arbitration courts. In Egypt, the French company Veolia challenged the government for its decision to increase the minimum wage. The company used the Investment Treaty between France and Egypt to demand US$ 110 million in compensation from the Government. This means that foreign companies can challenge labour laws (such as the Minimum Wages Act or maternity benefit provisions) arguing that it increases their cost of operation and take the Government to the ISDS court where litigation itself is financially devastating.The RCEP will also have adverse impacts on the price of medicines, on agricultural livelihoods, on the privatisation of essential services, on progressive industrial policy – by giving more power and rights to companies. The Modi government has aligned with big capital and the elite to weaken the trade union movement as the proposed labour law reforms demonstrates. The RCEP is but one more step in that direction.How can we STOP RCEP?The RCEP negotiations continue in secret, with the public and elected representatives kept in the dark. Trade Unions must unite to demand that the Modi Government be accountable to the people and for a due democratic process to be followed.Raise your voice! India will host a round of negotiations at the end of July (tentatively 24-28 July) in Hyderabad, Telangana. Trade Unions, farmers groups, health activists, and other people’s movements are planning to organise a series of events in Hyderabad to put pressure on the Government of India to withdraw from the RCEP negotiations.Express your solidarity, share this pamphlet and tell others why workers should REJECT RCEP!Issued by Forum against FTAs
2017 marks the 50th year of the Asian Development Bank (ADB). Shalmali Guttal, Executive Director of Focus on the Global South, explains why civil society organisations and movements have been organising against destructive ADB projects for the past 20 years. This video was filmed part of a series for the Working Group on IFIs called, ADB: Voices from the Ground.
Transcript:
I am Shalmali Guttal and I am with Focus on the Global South.
We have been fighting the ADB for 20 years now.
We have been monitoring and watching closely and organizing against the ADB’s policies and projects. We continue to do this because the model of development that the ADB promotes, supports, and finances is an extractivist, exploitative, and destructive development model.
This is a kind of development that exploits nature, it exploits workers, it exploits the knowledge and potential of people both in rural and urban areas.
It does not support peasants, fisherfolk, indigenous peoples, it does not support workers, it does not support women from urban and rural poor areas, it does not support children, or nutrition, or public health, or the right to food.
In fact, the kind of development that the Asian Development Bank, the ADB supports is one that serves the interests of corporations and large private businesses so that they can extract maximum whatever value they want from both nature and society.
We have yet to see even one project of the ADB that has resulted in actual benefits for local people, that has actually resulted in the environment getting better.
In addition to all this is the problem that ADB is completely unaccountable.
It has a charter which is endorsed and supported and written by our governments, or the member governments, and the charter offers ADB full immunity.
So that means the ADB can plan, design, finance, support any type of project with any kind of impact and it will never be accountable for this – it will never have to pay for material harm, it cannot be taken to court, it cannot be legally sued.
Local communities are sued, our governments can be sued but the ADB is protected from all of this, it has immunity.
It is because of its charter.
So, it is in a way a master criminal.
It designs a crime, it conceptualizes the crime, it finances the crime, it makes somebody else carry out the crime but in the end it will never be arrested or make to pay for its crime.
So for all these reasons, we must keep fighting the ADB and make sure that the ADB is shut down.
There can be no reformed ADB.
Manila—FOCUS on the Global South led a thematic discussion on lack of transparency, increasing oppression, and shrinking of CSO space as part of the conference called “Asian Peoples' Call on Challenging the ADB's Immunity,” held April 19-20 at the University of the Philippines in Quezon City,
The session, participated in by around 30 participants, among them veteran ADB campaigners as well as youth leaders learning about ADB for the first time, aimed to unpack the issues and challenges confronting affected communities and campaigners resisting ADB policies and projects on the ground. It also sought to examine the ways by which ADB’s immunity promotes and propagates corporate and state impunity through various processes and mechanisms, and to identify ways to move forward through continuing campaigns and actions.
A distinguished panel representing affected communities as well as campaign organizations across the Asian region addressed the key objectives of the thematic discussion.
Thilak Kariyawasam from Sri Lanka’s Nature Group began the conversation by raising a fundamental issue hounding ADB projects—the lack of transparency and public participation. Several speakers also weighed in on this problem, citing specific instances where projects were implemented without the knowledge and consent of communities. In cases where consultations had been held, many of the groups opposing the projects were not represented and only the voices of those who support the projects were heard.
Thilak also criticized the ADB for its strong efforts to influence government’s position on specific projects, oftentimes to suit private sector demands, as well as its efforts to “mislead the public and sow divisions within the community by organizing so-called ‘allies’ within civil society supposedly supportive of its policies and projects.
For her part, Josephine Ignacio, who represented the local campaigns organization Defenders of the Environment for Genuine Development or DEFEND-Zambales, shared similar concerns over what she called as ‘false promises of the ADB” that the projects would benefit farming and fishing communities with more jobs, livelihoods, and free transportation and electricity. Ms. Ignacio and DEFEND-Zambales continue to lead the fight against the 630-megawatt Masinloc coal-fired thermal power plant, one of the largest base-load ‘clean-coal’ power plants in the Philippines and still pushing for further expansion of its operations.
DEFEND-Zambales has documented health and environmental cases, loss of livelihoods as well as problems of dislocation of affected communities and second-generation issues associated with resettlement and relocation.
ADB’s Culpability
A key point raised in the discussion is how the ADB has been able to evade all of these issues by hiding behind the wall of immunity since its inception in 1967. The ADB’s charter provides the institution a high degree of immunity from legal liabilities and accountability to national laws for problematic projects and faulty policy advise. The panelists articulated a litany of issues against the ADB for which the Bank should be held accountable. These included its continued support for projects that violate laws and its failure to ensure compliance to even out its own policies. Here a contradiction was pointed out, namely that while the ADB in many occasions has not hesitated to exercise its power and influence to change laws that favor its own commercial interest and those of the private sector, in other occasions it has feigned a lack of power to demand from governments strong enforcement of laws that would have favored the community and the environment, thereby washing its hands of violations and abuses committed by governments in the name of these projects.
ADB’s relations with authoritarian regimes was also highlighted and that this has borne out of the ADB’s own history of continued push for loans, financing projects by dictatorial governments, often despite clear issues of misuse of funds and corruption. In the name of protecting these massive investment projects financed by the ADB, governments across Asia have often resorted to force, leading to increased militarization in the countryside.
By continuing to push projects in countries where there have been documented cases of corruption and human rights violations, and furthermore, by not speaking out against these issues, ADB has in effect been condoning, supporting, and promoting these regimes.
The discussion on the intersection of government policies, corporate agenda, and the ADB’s own operations focused on the need to view ADB’s immunity within the context of a broader architecture of impunity where governments and the corporate private sector are allowed to violate laws, ignore peoples’ rights, violate peoples’ rights, and destroy the environment.
The Continuing Struggle
Eang Vuthy of Equitable Cambodia summed up what needed to be done moving forward. He elaborated on their own efforts to raise the peoples’ awareness on the negative impacts of ADB on development, and their commitment to continue to organize communities to resist policies and projects that undermine the peoples’ aspirations for a better life.
Exploring different ways of educating people through cultural forms, engaging in street actions and protests, lobbying with governments, and building and strengthening networks and movements would be some of the strategies that campaigners across Asia would use to challenge the ADB.
The campaigners also stressed the importance of sustaining documentation
and sharing of stories and struggles of affected communities, as well as research and analysis to expose the gaps between what these projects have promised and the realities on the ground.
For many countries across Asia, the campaigns against ADB policies and projects go back decades. The campaigners, thus, highlighted the importance of re-telling stories of affected communities for the youth to understand and appreciate the long history of peoples’ struggles against the Bank.
The participants also vowed to step up the efforts to link up and find convergences with other campaign and strengthen international solidarity for broader systemic changes and alternatives, such as the overhaul of economic policies.
Another area of work that has been slowly gaining ground is the legal recourse that has already been explored by some campaigns, through the filing of legal cases in the International Court of Justice. There was a strong assertion from the group that in the wake of shrinking spaces for peoples’ participation and instituting public policy across Asia, peoples and communities should continue to find ways to open up new spaces and expand previous platforms or avenues. The use of social media was also cited as a powerful tool to put messages across to a broader audience.
Overall, the session underscored the urgency to create and foster alternative models of development and development financing, which would promote people’s rights, protects livelihoods and the environment, and expand spaces for democratic participation of the people, especially the marginalized and the poor so that they can exercise a greater measure of influence on governments. This means keeping in check and shrinking the power of public and multilateral institutions such as the ADB.
New Delhi—People’s movements and other civil society organizations across India are holding over 100 actions of protest in 21 states of the country between May 1 and 7 to mark the 50th anniversary of the establishment of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), highlighting gross human rights violations, loss of livelihood, and environmental destructions caused by the ‘development model’ being pushed by ADB and other international financial institutions (IFIs), while using public money.
In the first week of May, the organizations launched multiple activities that exposed the ADB’s neo-liberal capitalist model of growth, where public money was used to promote private corporations, and its failed development paradigm, through raising the larger issues related to issues of accountability and transparency of ADB and other IFIs.
Shaktiman Ghosh, General Secretary of the National Hawker Federation, a trade union implementing programs in several states said, “The model of development pushed by ADB has resulted in the loss of livelihood and forced eviction, pushing people to poverty, condradicting ADB’s stated motto of ‘fighting poverty’ In urban areas, where the hawkers are the badly hit. However, with increasing privatisation of services, even the middle class will not be spared.” (See his video message: https://youtu.be/LguAaY4Lwvo)
Some of the activities being organized during the occasion range from protests, to public talks, to lecture series that will highlight the serious impacts of ADB’s lending, at a time when ADB is celebrating 50 years during which its lending portfolio of just over $3 billion during the first decade has grown to $123 billion in the last decade.
The activities are geographically spread from Bilaspur in Himachal Pradesh to Thiruvananthapuram in Kerala, and to the Mundra in Gujarat to Dibrugarh in Assam. While the Peoples’ Forum Against IFIs, a platform of people’s movements and civil society organizations working against the ill effects of international financing, is the one coordinating these 100+ events, the actions are being organized by local organizations in a manner which is relevant to them, and that will highlight their struggles / issues and seek transparency and accountability from IFIs.
“ADB needs to seriously review its push for hydro-projects in India, particularly in the Himalayas, in the name of clean energy program in light of the adverse environmental and social fallouts of its projects and the complete failure of its safeguard policies in this context,” Manshi Asher of Himdhara - Environment Research and Action Collective said.
“Further, the escalation of costs in these projects has put a question mark on the financial feasibility of hydro power projects,” she added. (See her viideo message: https://youtu.be/iYkVNQFrDgI)
ADB’s investments resulting in the undermining of local governance bodies and other traditional institutions have come to the fore time and again. “The arrogance with which the destruction of cultures and communities by way of bulldozing our rights and the condescending belief that we indigenous peoples of the North-East are uniformed enough to be auctioning our rights and our way of living to the highest ‘development’ bidder like the IFIs such as ADB, needs to be done away with. We are not stupid and we will do our best to protect our land and culture!,” Ratika Yumnam of Indigenous Perspectives said.
Highlighting the disproportionate influence IFIs have on the policies and other lending agencies, Leo Saldhana of Environmental Support Group Bangalore said, “ADB has always played the role of influencing a form of development that ensures revenue from loan recipient countries flows out to the coffers of countries that control the bank's stocks. For instance, ADB pushed for Metro projects in India, and after these super-expensive mega projects were well on their way but without serving the real need - of addressing public transport, the bank backed out.
“The way had already been paved of Japan Bank and JICA to step in to finance the Metro project, as is the case in Bangalore. Interestingly, the project has 300 percent cost over-runs and is yet not functional. Meanwhile, the entire city has been reduced to a mess of what it was before: India's 'garden city', but not anymore!”
Coastal Gujarat Power Ltd (Tata Mundra) a $4bn, 4000 MW coal based thermal power plant in Kutch Gujarat is one the projects ADB is co-financing, causing damage to people and environment. As confirmed by its own accountability mechanism, Complaiance Review Panel, the project has violated ADB’s policies on consultating with communities, the sanctioning of the project was based on erroneous social impact assessment and due to the project the fish catch has reduced drastically, threatening the livelihood of thousands of fish-workers.
“Our plea to ADB to restore the livelihood of the fish-workers have fallen on deaf ears. While they are celebrating their 50 years, the fish workers in Mundra are struggling to make ends meet,” Bharat Patel, General Secretary of Machimar Adhikaar Sangharsh Sangathan said. (His video message: https://youtu.be/3OePpbHqKIo)
Through these 100+ actions, people’s movements and other CSOs are demanding the ADB to mend their ways of lending, be transparent and accountable to people in whose name they run their business. Failing with these, the people will be left with no option than to strengthen their struggles, despite repressive laws curbing their right to dissent, freedom of expression, and freedom of assembly.
Details of places of actions: https://wgonifis.net/places-of-action/
Video messages to ADB: https://wgonifis.net/videos/
April 20, 2017
Preamble
Since 1966, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) has peddled the illusion that it is an institution committed to making the region free from poverty. According to the Bank, it has mobilized more than USD 250 billion worth of investments in infrastructure, research, and knowledge sharing in its half a century of operations in Asia and the Pacific. The ADB, however, shamelessly continues to shell out illegitimate debts to its member countries even if it had disastrous project and policy outcomes. Fifty years of ADB operations has left a track record of people displaced, impoverished, malnourished, and hungry. The destructive impacts spread across all facets of the environment: forests, rivers, oceans, arable lands including endangered and close-to-extinction animal and plant species in their habitats. The ADB is also guilty of contributing to global warming through its financing of dirty energy projects.
We, the community representatives, youth associations, students, and civil society organizations gathered here on the 19th– 20th of April 2017 at the University of the Philippines SOLAIR declare that,
Exploring the destructive Impacts of ADB Immunity across thematic sectors we observe that,
1) Financing Dams, Displacement, and Destruction
2) Inequality, Debt, and Transfer of Wealth to Private Sector
3) The Climate Crisis and Decarbonizing of ADB at 50 years
4) Lack of Transparency, Oppression, and Shrinking CSO Space
5) ADB’s Exploitation of Labor
6) Social Inclusivity and ADB’s Impacts on Vulnerable Groups
Asian Peoples Call on Challenging ADB’s Immunity
We further declare that the struggles and evidences above demonstrate that the ADB has failed miserably in its responsibilities to the people of Asia and has no ground to retain its immunity. It is time to call out ADB’s false Immunity claim everywhere across Asia. It has betrayed its trust as a development partner to the borrowing governments and their people and should be held fully responsible for all its actions and impacts.
Therefore, we, the Asian Peoples, call on our governments and people’s representatives to strip ADB’s Immunity and hold it accountable for all its actions against our dignity, our rights, our sovereignty and our mother earth.
A workshop organized by Focus on the Global South in part of the "Asian People's Call on Challenging the ADB's Immunity Conference, held last 20 April 2017 at the University of the Philippines, School of Labor and Industrial Relations.
The session aimed to unpack how the Asian Development Bank’s immunity promotes and propagates corporate and state impunity through various processes and mechanisms such as policy conditionalities, promotion of privatization, and financing of destructive and extractivist projects that undermine people's and local communities' rights, livelihoods and self-determination.
The session also highlighted the Bank’s role in human rights abuses and restricting political spaces and channels of information, justice and people’s discourses on development and well-being. The speakers also shared strategies and actions to challenge, limit and end the ADB’s immunity and the state-corporate impunity that it enables.
Lastly, the session featured community leaders, veteran activists, and advocates from Sri Lanka, Cambodia, Mekong and the Philippines.
Keynote speech/presentation by Shalmali Guttal, Executive Director of Focus on the Global South, during the "Asian People's Call on Challenging the ADB's Immunity Conference". 20 April, 2017, University of the Philippines - School of Labor and Industrial Relations.
Presentation can be downloaded at the link below
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 changing_landscape_of_development_finance_in_asia.pdf | 583.87 KB |
Focus on the Global South joined thousands of workers, labor groups, civil society organizations, and social movements in Manila to commemorate International Workers' Day. May 1 is also known as Labor Day and is a public holiday in the Philippines. Why do we have Labor Day? For whom is Labor Day celebrated?"
Judy Ann Chan-Miranda of Partido Manggagawa shares us her thoughts on May Day.
Para Saan at Kanino ang Mayo Uno?
Manila, Philippines
1 May 2017
"Huwag nating kalilimutan bakit tayo nandito -- tayo ay boses; tayo ay kumakatawan hindi lamang sa mga banderang dala-dala natin; hindi tayo nandito lang dahil sa kulay ng mga damit natin. Nandito tayo para sa milyung-milyong manggagawa na nais nating organisahin, pakilusin, at himukin na sumama sa laban -- laban para sa trabaho, laban para sa regular na trabaho, laban para sa sweldong nakakabuhay, laban para sa mga batas paggawa at pagkilala na tayo ay hindi mga basahan o hindi tayo mga kalakal na dapat tinatawaran. Ang lakas paggawa ng manggagawang bumubuhay sa lipunan ay dapat pinapahalagahan dahil tayo ang bumubuhay ng mga kasama. Itayo natin ang dignidad ng manggagawa."
"Let us not forget what brought us here and why we are here -- we carry the voice; we represent not only the banners that proclaim who we are; we are not here simply because of the colors that represent our political ideologies and principles. We are here for the millions of workers we want to organize, to move into action, and to join the struggles -- struggles for decent work, struggles for fair and adequate living wages to raise and rear our families in dignity, struggle for laws that will respect, honor, and protect the rights of workers, and to insist that we should not be treated like disposable rags or goods that can be traded for profit. The workers are the foundation on which societies are built and which allow for its continued existence. Let us uphold our workers' dignity."
Powered by flickr embed.
2017 marks the 50th anniversary of the Asian Development Bank (ADB), the second largest source of development finance in the Asia-Pacific region, next to the World Bank Group. In the last five decades, the ADB has moved more than USD 250 billion in a bid to promote economic growth, facilitate regional trade integration, and expand opportunities. However, for many civil society groups, social movements, and communities affected by ADB financing, the institution has been an agent of inequitable development, fostering inequalities and mis-governance. The ADB has enjoyed the highest degree of immunity as guaranteed by its own charter. This means that it is immune to legal liabilities and accountability to national laws for problematic investments, faulty policy advice, violation of people’s rights and livelihoods, and destruction of the environment.
Focus has long been researching and sharing analyses of the negative impacts of ADB operations, calling for an end to the ADB’s immunity and lack of accountability. In 2017, we join people’s movements and civil society in building a region-wide challenge to the ADB’s immunity
On the occasion of the 50th Annual Governors’ Meeting of the ADB which is happening in Yokohama, Japan from May 4-7, 2017, Focus on the Global South is releasing this special newsletter highlighting the Asian people’s resistance against the Bank. Earlier writings and materials on the ADB produced by Focus can be found here: https://focusweb.org/page/adb50
A printable pdf version is available at the link above
Contents:
It’s been over a year since the late afternoon on 16 April 2016 when Den Kamlae went missing on his way to collect forest items. Material evidence was later discovered between 23-25 March 2017. Today, these important materials are still under examination by forensic scientists and the Central Institute of Forensic Science (CIFS).
The life of Den Kamlae was shaped by conflict and difficult environments; from childhood poverty he fought to establish justice in society in adulthood. He continued the fight and joined the Communist Party of Thailand, and later on played a prominent role in demanding land rights for his community together with the Esaan Land Reform Network and P-Move.
Cases of torture and enforced disappearance occur constantly in Thai society. In the recent past, many community leaders and social activists, including Somchai Neelapaijit and “Billy” Polajee Rakchongcharoen, have faced the same fate, ending up as “victims of injustice”. Although the cause of Den Kamlae’s disappearance has not been determined, it is certain that he did not get lost in the forest, nor get injured by wild animals.
The aforementioned does not state that the disappearance of Den Kamlae is connected to any individuals or agencies. However, there are certain observations about the evidence discovered in March. The scene where the materials were found was steep, and the placement as well as the conditions of them are time-inconsistent.
Thus, we are urging relevant agencies to hasten the examination process truthfully, and are calling for another inspection of the scene by experts, since there are other materials such as a shirt, hat, spade, and particularly bones from a skeleton - besides the skull - that have been found, among other items.
Furthermore, on 9th January 2012, Thailand signed the Convention Against Torture (CAT) to express its intention in promoting, protecting and ensuring human rights. Subsequently, human rights organizations together with the Ministry of Justice joined forces to push the draft Prevention and Suppression of Torture and Enforced Disappearance Act forward. The draft was ultimately rejected by the National Legislative Assembly. Nonetheless, this draft is the only hope for the families of disappeared persons to access justice.
It is time for Thai society to understand the crucial issues of torture and enforced disappearance, as well as to realize the necessity of law enforcement to solve such issues.
On the occasion of the 1 year anniversary of the disappearance of Den Kamlae, we would like to take the opportunity to pay our respect to other activists who shared the same courage to convey justice to society that led them meet their unfortunate fates. Their selfless dedication and purpose will live on. The truth will be exactly revealed in the end.
Sincerely,
Organizers and participants to the event to commemorate 1 year of the disappearance of Den Kamlae
Manila -- Representatives of major Philippine trade unions in both the public and private sectors are concerned about the possible impacts of the Regional Economic Comprehensive Partnership Agreement (RCEP) currently being negotiated in Manila. Among the issues they see resulting from the agreement are increase in the prices of medicines, government revenue decrease, and that government’s ability to regulate foreign investments, service providers, and transnational corporations may be constrained.
The analysis of the labor groups is based on leaked draft texts of the RCEP, as no official document has been made public throughout the four years of negotiations. Only negotiators and key business representatives have had access to the official documents. Even Congress has been blindsided, thus constraining the democratic process, they said.
RCEP is a mega free trade and investment agreement being negotiated between 16 countries in the Asian region—the 10 ASEAN countries plus India, China, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand.
The proposal to have an international private arbitration process that would ignore national laws and the Philippine Constitution, and where investors can make multi-billion claims against governments, was another concern the groups raised.
At a meeting attended by major labor centers like SENTRO and the Trade Union Congress of the Philippines (TUCP), affiliates of global union federations such as PSLink, IndustriALL and Building and Woodworkers Intl., solidarity support organizations like SASK, and the Trade Justice Campaign - Pilipinas, held on May 5 2017 in Quezon City, Dave Diwa, of the National Labor Union (NLU) called RCEP a “danger zone that governments should avoid at all costs.”
Vicente Camilon Jr. of the TUCP added that “RCEP might constraint our government’s power to regulate, undermine national sovereignty, and limit it ability to pursue national development objectives.”
Jillian Roque of Public Services Labor Independent Confederation (PSLINK) added that the deal "could diminish public funds that should be devoted to basic social services.”
The labor unions stressed the corporate-bias of RCEP. Glen Pastorfide of the Philippine Government Employees Association (PGEA) said that RCEP could strengthen the power of corporations while weakening policies that seek to protect and conserve our natural resources and ecosystems.”
Alan Tanjusay of Associated Labor Unions (ALU) pointed out that “RCEP has no social dimension. Our government will be prevented from instituting policies and regulations beneficial to working people.”
Wilson Fortaleza of the Partido ng Manggagawa concluded that “RCEP is a global corporate agenda of regional oligarchs.”
“Clearly, the RCEP is as bad as the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement (TPP),” Josua Mata, Secretary General of SENTRO, declared. “If Pres. Duterte rejected TPP, then he should, at the very least, be worried about RCEP as well,” he added.
Statement of Trade Justice-Pilipinas on the 18th Round of RCEP talks in Manila
Trade Justice Pilipinas, a broad platform campaigning for just trade and investment policies, expresses its opposition to the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership agreement or RCEP.
We urge the leaders of the ASEAN Member States to defend the primacy of human rights, environmental integrity, and peoples’ welfare against international economic agreements like RCEP that advance commercial interests and the corporate agenda, and impinge on the ability of the government to advance the greater public interest.
Furthermore, we call on the Philippine government, as Chair of ASEAN for 2017, to demonstrate leadership in raising the peoples’ concerns against RCEP during the 18th round of talks here in Manila.
In the Chairman’s Statement from the 30th ASEAN Summit in Manila, Member States led by the Philippines, reiterated the common vision to build a truly inclusive, people-centered, and people-oriented ASEAN community and stressed the centrality of ASEAN in the RCEP talks.
We assert that RCEP and other new generation free trade and investment agreements ran counter to the vision of a people-centered ASEAN. Contrary to the view expressed by ASEAN leaders that the RCEP talks have progressed considerably, the direction of the talks have in fact moved backwards with the agenda becoming more ambitious, albeit in favor of transnational corporations, therefore demanding deeper commitments from parties. RCEP has become in many respects worse than the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement or TPP.
Our opposition to RCEP is anchored on the following concerns:
RCEP is a threat to public health and peoples’ access to medicines. The proposed agreement with TPP+ and TRIPS+ provisions on intellectual property rights will make it harder for poor people in the region to access affordable medicines particularly life-saving drugs, and for governments to advance public health policies for the benefit of the poor. The IPR chapter and many other provisions in the proposed agreement could undermine State policies on public health enshrined in Constitutions and national health laws like the Cheaper Medicines law in the Philippines.
RCEP will give corporations—many of which have annual revenues bigger than the GDPs of most countries in ASEAN, the right to sue governments over public policies and regulations in secret, ad-hoc corporate courts.
The investor state dispute settlement provision or ISDS, which has been highly criticized in the context of TPP negotiations, should be strongly rejected as well by ASEAN governments as an instrument that will weakening the right of State to regulate investments in the name of the greater public interest.
RCEP will straight-jacket governments, curtailing their power to use public policies to advance development agenda by putting in place prohibitions on performance requirement such as policies on domestic content and export restrictions, policies that favor employment of locals over foreign workers or even those that push for technology transfer.
Just like in all other trade negotiations, the Legislative Branches of the different governments are almost entirely shut out of the process, even as the proposals on the table would in fact amend if not repeal existing laws. In the same breathe, while these Legislatures have the power of taxation, they have practically no say in trade and investment negotiations that would eventually lead to losses in tariffs and other taxes.
Amidst the continuing backlash against globalization policies that have disenfranchised and marginalized the working class, the imperative is really to push back on RCEP and new generation trade and investment agreements that advance the corporate agenda over peoples’ interests.
The English version is available here: https://focusweb.org/content/engine-economic-growth-overview-private-inv...
Statement from iDEFEND on the declaration of martial law in Mindanao, the Philippines
On Tuesday night, President Rodrigo Duterte declared Martial Law on the entire Mindanao Island while on a state visit in Russia, following the fighting between the military and the Maute group.
It has to be clarified that the clashes were triggered by law enforcement operation in Marawi. This is a situation started by the government itself. Similarly, the Maute group is a local terrorist group, and not ISIS, even as the former tries to ally itself with ISIS.
We condemn the violence perpetrated by the Maute group to advance their political interest. Attacking civilian population not party to the conflict between government forces and the Maute violates duly recognized human rights of the people and violation of International Humanitarian Law on armed conflict.
While the fighting has endangered the life of civilians in the area, Martial Law does not alleviate this danger nor ensure the resolution of conflict and achievement of peace. Note that the National State of Emergency Due to Lawless Violence, declared after the Davao bombing, is still in place nationwide.
Martial Law adversely affects civilians as this would curtail many of their rights. Without Martial Law, the military has engaged and fought terrorist groups in Mindanao and can continue to do so as their obligation and mandate.
With Martial Law, the civil and political rights of the civilians, and their lives, are endangered more than ever. Confusion and insecurity among communities may be taken advantaged of by different armed groups, furthering the violence in Marawi, and the rest of Mindanao. Human rights abuses are bound to happen, especially under a presidency which has openly shown no respect for human rights. It could potentially endanger striking workers and other protesting activists in Mindanao.
The public has the right to be informed of the situation in Mindanao and as of the declaration of Martial Law, a lot of questions remained unanswered. Defense Secretary Lorenzana himself told media that "there is intelligence" about the situation in Marawi, but that this intel has been wrongly interpreted. If the situation in Marawi had to do with weaknesses in the execution of its job, Martial Law, and over the entire Mindanao Island, is NOT the answer to this shortcoming or failure.
The 1987 Constitution has limited the President's powers to place the country or any part of it under martial law to two situations - invasion or rebellion - and only when the public safety requires it. Clearly, only compelling reasons must justify martial law. The current situation does not constitute sufficient factual basis for the proclamation of martial law or the potential suspension of the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus.
WE CALL ON THE CONGRESS TO REVOKE THE DECLARATION OF MARTIAL LAW!
Please also see other statements from allies in the Philippines: SENTRO, Mindanao People's Peace Movement (MPPM) and Block Marcos.
While in Ecuador this month, Mary Ann Manahan from the Philippines team gave a radio interview to Pressenza Internacional En La Oreja. Click here to hear the interview in Spanish, or read the transcript below in English.
Interview Transcript
Brief about the politics in the Philippines and Southeast Asia (SEA)
The Philippines and SEA are experiencing a massive political crisis with the rise of dictatorial and repressive regimes. We have shrinking democratic spaces, human right violations and a culture of impunity. For example, the war on drugs (similar to Colombia and Mexico) introduced by the new president of the Philippines, Rodrigo Duterte, has claimed more than 8,000 lives, mostly from poor communities.
Our economies have been destroyed by three decades of capitalist and neoliberal policies. And even though our economies are growing, we have high rates of poverty and inequality, especially when it comes to control over the territories and commons by farmers, indigenous peoples, fishers and women.
There's also a strong tradition of resistance and political pressures towards government and exacting accountability from corporations and governments.
Main resistances in SEA
One of the main resistance struggles in the region is around the defense and reclaiming of the commons.
The commons is similar to the notion of territories by indigenous peoples here in Ecuador. These are land, water, biodiversity, seeds which belong to communities and societies for the collective good of present and future generations.
But the commons are threatened by capital, large scale investments, free trade and investment agreements, and Chinese investments.
There are numerous cases of land grabbing, privatization and enclosures happening across the region: from Indonesia, which plans to build multiple corridors for food for export and palm oil plantations, to Cambodia which has given multiple concessions to Vietnamese, Thai and Chinese mining and agricultural companies.
There's also the biggest challenge in the Mekong river, where hundreds of large scale and small dams for hydroelectric power under the name of “sustainable hydropower” are being constructed, with the aim to export electricity to key cities such as Bangkok for the growing middle class. The impacts are devastating for local people's and communities, in particular indigenous and farming communities. They have been displaced, dispossessed and uprooted from their source of life and identity. For SEA governments, development equals investments and vice versa. This is development without people, poor and marginalized communities. It's a development that's only for the rich, corporations and political and economic elites.
Women's role in the struggles
Women play a very important role in resistance struggles. They are at the frontline of struggles. For example, in Cambodia in a community called Bangkouek lake, 90% of the protesters are women. They have left their jobs to devote themselves full time to resisting because their homes are threatened in favor of a real state development to give rise to buildings.
In another community in a well-known tourism destination in the Philippines called Boracay, the indigenous communities have been displaced by resorts and commercial interests. But in 2014, they conducted a land occupation to claim their ancestral lands which have already been recognized in law and time immemorial. They successfully reclaimed their lands and are now living a life with dignity and hope. They have constructed their own livelihoods as well.
What are the perspectives on alternatives?
There are a number of alternative perspectives that challenge capitalist expansion in Southeast Asia. One is the practice of agroecology where communities resist monoculture and industrial agriculture by growing food without poison. They say that by doing so, they protect the soil but also the people that are eating their food. And agroecology is a practice which is also being used by communities devastated by climate change disasters.
For example, in central Philippines, a community had to reconstruct their lives and homes from zero, from nothing, because everything was gone and flattened by the super-typhoon that hit our country. They have to rebuild their courage, self-esteem as well because of the trauma. And slowly in the last 3 years the people were able to rebuild their farms. Now they are harvesting agroecological products for their homes and for their community.
But this was done because of the tremendous effort and organization of peoples and communities using pressure politics to demand from government. It was not the state that rebuilt the lives of people in post disaster situations, it was the people themselves taking their future into their own hands and collectively recreating their societies. These are the kinds of alternatives which governments should enable to flourish and not investments for capitalist greed and extraction and domination of nature.
In the recent[c1] “RCEP 18th Round of Talks,” members of civil society organizations and social movements presented their positions vis-à-vis the RCEP during the official Stakeholders’ Engangement, focusing on its impacts on trade, labor, and resources. They argued against the RCEP as it will give more power to already powerful corporations while making worse the state of employment and labor conditions for workers. Its bias in favor of income and market growth will also endanger the country’s resources, such as aquatic resources. The articles below are based on the presentations made in the said event, with few changes to fit the newsletter style.
Impact of RCEP’s Investor State Dispute Settlement Mechanism (ISDS)
Joseph Purugganan
Head of Philippine Office
Focus on the Global South
The Investor State Dispute Settlement Mechanism or ISDS remains one of the most toxic elements of RCEP and other new generation free trade and investment agreements. RCEP through ISDS will make corporations, many of them with annual revenues bigger than the GDPs of most countries in ASEAN, more economically powerful than the governments in these countries. These corporations are being given the ‘right’ to sue governments over public policies and regulations in secret ad-hoc tribunals. These tribunals, or more accurately, corporate courts have handed down million-dollar rulings that have penalized governments over regulatory actions to defend public health, pursue more inclusive development, protect the environment, and uphold public interest in general.
Over the last decade, we’ve seen a dramatic increase in the number of ISDS cases. In 2016, investors initiated 62 known ISDS cases, a figure higher than the 10-year average of 49 cases (2006-2015). UNCTAD estimates that the total number of publicly known arbitration cases against host countries has now reached 767. The signing of more investment treaties, including FTAs with more expansive investment chapters like RCEP, are partly to be blamed for the rise in ISDS cases. Clearly, these agreements have emboldened corporations to use this mechanism to challenge the States’ right to regulate. More than 60 percent of awards handed down by these tribunals in favor of corporations are between US10 million and over a billion. Add to this the enormous cost of litigation, then it wouldn’t be hard to surmise the tremendous strain these cases exact on public budgets and therefore on the ability of governments to support development goals and the public welfare.
ISDS is a tool only for corporations. There is no recourse available for communities that face the negative impacts of these investments. They cannot challenge these corporations in the face of human rights violations, destruction of the environment, loss of livelihoods resulting from these investments.
We commend the efforts of certain countries, notably India Indonesia and the Philippines, in[J2] pushing for processes that aim to rebalance the need for investments and for policy space anchored on the governments’ right to regulate. These efforts show that governments are now taking a more balanced and cautious approach towards trade and investment treaties; and that public policies are paramount to corporate interests. RCEP therefore with its expansive investment chapter and ISDS will constitute a step back from these progressive efforts.
Focus on the Global South together with Trade Justice-Pilipinas, a broad platform campaigning for just trade and investment policies, strongly urge the governments negotiating RCEP on behalf of their people to reject ISDS, resist the corporate agenda underpinning these talks, and instead work together to pursue and scale up efforts to rebalance and overhaul investment policies towards a more just, equitable, and inclusive development.
Impact on Public Health and Access to Medicines
Ana Maria Nemenzo
Coordinator
Woman Health Philippines
Access to medicines is a vital component of quality health care. The heavy cost of health care is borne by Filipino households; about 56 to57percent of total health expenditures are drawn from private out-of-pocket. Of this out-of-pocket expenditures, about 60 percent are for medicines alone, obviously the largest single item of health care.
About a third (31 percent) of all reimbursements from Philhealth, the National Health Insurance Program, are for medicines, making medicines the second largest item in payments by Philhealth.
A past drug price survey (year 2005) revealed that prices for originator brand medicines were on average 15 times greater than international reference prices, while lowest-price generic equivalents were still more than six times the reference price.
A study conducted by the European Commission in 2010 revealed that the level of availability of essential drugs in public health facilities at all levels was only 25.3 percent.
This is why we campaigned for the passage of the Cheaper Medicines Law (Republic Act 9502), which was approved in 2008. The Universally Accessible Cheaper and Quality Medicines Act of 2008 is considered a landmark legislation that upholds the people’s right to health and access to affordable and quality medicines. Through this law, government affirms its constitutional mandate “to protect public health and when the public interest or circumstances of extreme urgency so require… adopt appropriate measures to promote and ensure access to affordable quality drugs and medicines for all.”
We oppose any and all TRIPS plus provisions in any free trade agreement that has provisions that violate people’s right to health and quality healthcare enshrined in our Philippine Constitution (Article 2 Section 15, and Article 13 Section 11).
We ask all involved in RCEP negotiations to reject any and all potential TRIPS-plus provisions in the RCEP now under negotiations that undermine our national laws and the Philippine Constitution that protect the right to health and the State’s commitment and obligation to public health as an overriding developmental concern and a guaranteed national policy.
Impact on Jobs and Workers’ Rights
Josua Mata
Secretary General
SENTRO
ASEAN projects itself as a sharing and caring community. But the things being secretly negotiated in RCEP do not reflect this.
Negotiating an agreement that would lead to job losses for the working people is not reflective of a "caring and sharing community." Consider the following:
First, my country, the Philippines, is participating in the RCEP negotiations without having a clear agro-industrial policy. Not knowing which industries are capable of withstanding intensified competition could lead to another round of de-industrialization similar to what the country experienced right after it had joined the WTO.
Second, the inclusion of provisions prohibiting investment performance requirements such as the hiring of local workers and ensuring use of local content would severely restrict our country’s ability to promote full employment.
And third, the severe loss of revenues from foregone tariffs and the pronounced shift to digital platforms as well as the privatization of government services that RCEP will promote would lead to hemorrhaging of employment in the government sector.
All these should be considered as red lines that should not be breached.
Negotiating an agreement that would harmonize standards—labor, health, and safety standards—as the least common denominator is not reflective of a caring and sharing community.
From the leaked documents that we have seen, we believe that RCEP would lead to the decrease in or stagnation of wage rates to make us “competitive”.
It would further expand contractualization in almost all sectors and would open migrant workers to more vulnerability.
We must have standards and we must have it at the highest level possible. Anything that would undermine this should be considered as red lines that should not be breached.
Having an ISDS that would allow corporations to challenge domestic regulations and more expansive IPR rules that would lead to higher cost of medicines is not reflective of a caring and sharing community. This is another line that should not be breached.
Finally, turning people into mere spectators while their lives are being bargained away is definitely not reflective of a caring and sharing community. Even efforts to engage only with "experts" would reduce us to mere spectators.
SENTRO believes that all these point to the fact that there is no place for RCEP in a caring and sharing community that ASEAN believes it is.
But should negotiations persist, then RCEP should be discussed with the full participation not just of the respective parliaments of participating countries but more importantly of the people who would be affected by this treaty.
Impact on farmers and small food producers
Myrna Dominguez
Policy and Advocacy Officer
Asia Pacific Network for Food Sovereignty
Members of civil society hope that our governments will listen to what we say. Yet, at the back of our minds we know that they already have their neoliberal frame of thought. Nevertheless, we hopethat they will listen to us.
Our network rejects RCEP not because we are against international trade but because what we want is a trade agreement that respects the rights of the people, that brings about real development—a development that uplifts the lives of the marginalized, especially the small farmers and fishers; not a development that gives corporate business control over our lands, forests, and water at the expense of our small food producers.
Anywhere you go in Asia you can see how resources are grabbed from small food producers by corporate businesses, yet this is call development? So we ask again, development for whom?
We are also not against regional integration, but what we want is a regional integration that will truly benefit the people. A regional integration that respects cultures of peoples, respects communities, and respects peoples' rights and sovereign will.
Unless thispremise of development changes, then we risk losing our planet earth.
Impact on Philippine Fisheries
Rizalito Lopez
Program Coodinator
Tambuyog Development Center
Further opening up fisheries, coastal, and marine resources to foreign investment will largely depend on the strength of the management regime of a country. The management regime in fisheries and coastal resources in the Philippines, considered still to be de facto open-access, encourages further depletion of fish stocks and degradation of marine and coastal habitats.
Presently, intrusions into municipal waters by commercial and destructive fishing vessels is prevalent, inspite of higher penalties under the newly amended fisheries law or Republic Act 10654. Many fishing vessels have illegal, unreported, and unregulated status.
Moreover, developed countries may have better market access, technology, or management procedures. Foreign companies that process and market fish would find it attractive to invest in fishing vessels in countries like the Philippines to diversify and secure more control over their sources of supply. In such situation, they will be able to operate fishing vessels more profitably while exercising control over the entire value chain.
Local small-scale fishing industry players will find themselves in a most difficult situation here since they would eventually lose out to foreign competitors in both export markets and the local processing industries in the Philippines. Since most of the investments are geared toward the export market, the impacts of resource extraction should be given due consideration.
Indeed, foreign investments in fisheries and aquaculture could contribute to employment and foreign exchange earnings to a certain extent. But investors are profit optimizers. Firms would cease to operate once profits are no longer attractive because the fishery and natural resources are already degraded due to unsustainable practices. Oftentimes the firms would leave without incurring accountability in restoring[c3] natural resources. We are all aware of the cases of abandoned mines, or those fishing companies leaving and transferring their capital investment to another country, because their target marine species like the blue-swimming crab and shrimps have been depleted. Policies for internalizing the social and environmental costs in doing business and investments that utilize natural resources must therefore be developed and enforced.
Another point is that fish is a cheap source of protein in the rural areas in the Philippines. An export-driven investment environment in the fishery and aquaculture sector may also have serious implications for domestic food security and fisheries’ sustainability.
In the midst of these impending threats, we call upon the governments involved in RCEP to craft investment policies that are geared more towards strengthening the sustainable management of fishery and aquaculture resources, promoting inclusive growth for industry players compliant to socially responsible and environment-friendly standards, and a balance between the objectives of domestic food security and those of export earnings .
The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement (RCEP), a mega-regional free trade agreement being negotiated by the 10-member ASEAN regional bloc and its FTA partners China, India, Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand held its 18th round of talks May 2-12 in Manila, Philippines. The RCEP talks gained more prominence recently in the wake of the US’ withdrawal from the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement or TPPA and the strong push from countries like Japan, Korea, Australia, and New Zealand to bring TPP standards to the RCEP negotiating table.
Previously seen as a China-led FTA, the just concluded round of RCEP talks showed[J1] that the negotiating positions of the 16 parties gravitated towards key alliances. Japan, South Korea, Australia, and New Zealand, the so-called TPP 4, comprised the group pushing for TPP+ provisions in RCEP on many issues, ranging from intellectual property rights to investments and e-commerce. ASEAN on the other hand forged regional unity around key issues guided by common principles and objectives, and the members asserted the centrality of the regional body in the RCEP talks. India, on the other hand, was the lone voice that raised particular concerns on further opening up trade in goods, particularly from the agricultural sector. While raising some concerns as well on certain aspects of the talks such as goods and e-commerce, China was seen as pushing for more ambitious investment chapter seeking to protect its growing investments across Asia and the Pacific.
The Philippines as Chair of ASEAN for 2017 will continue to play a key role in the forthcoming RCEP talks. After the 18th round of negotiations, the talks will move to Hyderabad, India for the 19th round in July, before moving back to the Philippines in September for the 20th round, where parties are hoping to finally conclude the negotiations.
Focus on the Global South is part of the regional campaign on RCEP. Our offices in Manila, Thailand, and India continue to work within broad national platforms to spearhead national campaigns against RCEP and other new generation FTAs.
The recently held 18th round of RCEP talks in Manila saw the convergence of various social movements and civil society organizations in coordinated inside and outside actions on RCEP. This special issue of Focus Newsletter features statements and analyses from allies in the Trade Justice-Pilipinas campaign platform and the ASEAN Civil Society Conference/ASEAN Peoples' Forum (ACSC/APF 2017), and all other actions and pronouncements issued throughout the NO RCEP week of action. – Joseph Purugganan
[J1]The alliances have been observed even before the round in Manila. So maybe better to just say that “the continuing talks have reveaked nego positions have converged around key alliances
PDF available for download
Malolos, Bulacan— Around 150 farmers, women, senior citizens, and children who were part of a "Lakbayan" (march) from Bataan to Malacanang to request President Rodrigo Duterte to help get the lands awarded to them under the government's agrarian reform program were prevented from entering Bulacan like by the Malolos police at 4pm on May 30. The farmers were set to stop and rest at the Social Action Center in Barasoain Church in Malolos before pushing for Manila in the morning of May 31.
According to Rolando Martinez of the Samahang Nagkakaisang Mamamayan ng Barangay Sumalo (SANAMABASU), a member organization of Save Agrarian Reform Alliance (SARA), the group was stopped by Malolos policemen almost a kilometer away from Barasoain Church. When they inquired why they were being blocked, they were initially told that the Archdiocese of Malolos had requested the police’s assistance in stopping the farmers. “Sabi po nila, hindi na daw kami patutuluyi dahil may dumating na VIP sa Barasoain at hindi na kami mapapapasok.” (According to them, they will not let us pass because important people arrived at the Barasoain Church)
But when the SARA Secretariat, Focus on the Global South, which has been assisting in the Lakbayan called up the Social Action Center (SAC) of Malolos, the latter denied making such a request and sent a representative instead to meet the farmers where they were blocked from proceeding to Barasoain Church. Focus has been working closely with the SAC of Malolos in setting up a place where farmers could spend the night and recover for the last leg of the march the next day. Food and water have also been prepared by the SAC to welcome the farmers.
The police told the farmers they were assembling illegally. The decision to intercept them in Bulacan allegedly came from the Malolos police chief and the Provincial Philippine National Police. However, the marchers had earlier sent a letter requesting the PNP to assist them for their 100-km march. They had been showing this letter, which had a received stamp from Central Luzon PNP, in every stopover. The police in Bulacan insisted to escort the farmers to Valenzuela to ensure that they will not camp out anywhere in the province.
Dead on their feet after walking for more than 30 kilometers from San Fernando, Pampanga, to Bulacan under the heat, the farmers requested for some consideration. But no amount of negotiation could convince the police to let the farmers stay in Bulacan last night. Near midnight and after more than five hours of negotiations with the police, Governor Wilhelmino Sy-Alvarado intervened and instructed that the farmers be granted passage to the Bulacan Sports Complex where they could spend the night.
Marcelina Sola, 58, however was already rushed to the hospital due exhaustion before she could even reach the sports complex. Despite the ordeal, the farmers said that they remain resolute and committed to continue their journey to achieve agrarian reform, peace, and justice for their community and the rest of the country.#
For more information, please contact:
Rolando Martinez, +63906-352-2905
Raphael Baladad, +63929-335-6582
Photo credit: Mhike Cigaral of CLTV36
01 June 2017
After four days of walking and marching from Hermosa, Bataan, armed only with their conviction that they needed to do this to get their lands under the government’s agrarian reform program, 400 farmers and support groups comprising rural women and other peasant organizations in the Save Agrarian Reform Alliance (SARA) arrived June 1 at the main offices of the Department of Agrarian Reform (DAR) in Quezon City.
Earlier, the farmers were welcomed by a youth contingent from KATARUNGAN when they entered Monumento. Police escorted them in their march along EDSA. Also joining the farmers in their 100-km Lakbayan were peasant and advocacy groups Kaisahan ng mga Maliliit na Magsasaka, Katipunan ng Bagong Pilipina, Pambansang Kaisahan ng Magbubukid sa Pilipins, Pambansang Katipunan ng Makabayang Magbubukid, and Pamabansang Koalisyon ng Kababaihan sa Kanayunan, PARAGOS-Pilipinas, and USAD-ATENEO. Some of the marchers, mostly senior citizens, got sick during the walk and were taken to the hospital to seek medical attention.
After nearly 11 years of struggle to own the lands they had tilled through the government’s Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program (CARP), farmers of Samahan ng Nagkakaisang Mamamayan ng Barangay Sumalo (SANAMABASU) from Hermosa Bataan, decided to bring their cause to the doorsteps of DAR central office, and make their clamour heard by President Duterte. The government has failed in protecting their land and human rights under the law, said Rolando Tolentino, leader of the Sumalo farmers.
The farmers marched to get back their 214 hectares of land being claimed by River Forest Development Corporation, owned by the Litton family from Forbes Park. They are asking that government intervene to stop the human rights violations, criminalization of their struggle, and to allow them to enter and till their farms. For more than three years now, their farming activities had been effectively stopped by the fences and gates erected by River Forest, and by its private security personnel. This has affected their ability to earn a living and has stirred not only hunger in the community but also unrest.
Martinez cited the failure of the government to stop the continuing violation of their right to land, life, liberty, and property which started after they made their petition for the coverage of the land under CARP.
“We would like to ask in person DAR Secretary Mariano and President Duterte about the change promised by this administration. Secretary Mariano said before that no farmer will be removed from his/her land under his administration in DAR. But now we are not only facing threat of eviction but we are also experiencing harassment and arrest,” Martinez said.
“It should not only be the conflict in Mindanao that should be the government’s concern, but also the slow, silent murder of the farmers in Bataan,” the farmer-leader added.
SARA also deplored the lack of serious attention of the government to cases involving ordinary farmers. According to SARA spokesperson, Trinidad Domingo, “government neglect has reinforced the violence and human rights abuses against farmers like the ones in Sumalo, Bataan.”
The groups also challenged Sec. Mariano to prove that the justice system under the Duterte administration is working fairly and justly by giving serious attention to cases of ordinary people like them.
In the launch of their Lakbayan, the farmers have: (a) called out on the DAR on its sluggish implementation of agrarian reform in the 214-hectare of land in Barangay Sumalo and other land conflict cases that the government has failed to prioritize; (b) expedite the installation of farmers in their land and the extension of support services under the program; (c) demand accountability from Sec Mariano, especially for his pronouncements that “no farmer will be evicted/displaced from the land they are tilling”, and (d) raise public awareness about the plight of small and landless farmers under the Duterte administration.
The Lakbayan coincides with the start of the anniversary month of the Comprehensive Agrarian Reform Program enacted in 1988, which is now on its 29th year of implementation.##
For interviews and more information:
Rolando Martinez, +63906-352-2905
Raphael Baladad, +63929-335-6582
More photos can be viewed here.
