INQUIRER Global Nation

NEW YORK, United States ? This past May 19th three members of a medical-relief mission were forced into a dark blue van by a group of armed men in the village of Kapanildan, town of La Paz, Tarlac.

The lone female abductee was a 31-year-old American citizen of Filipino parentage by the name of Melissa Roxas. Her two companions were Juanito Carabeo and John Edward Jandoc, Filipino citizens. Roxas was the first to be released, almost surely because she was an American national, on May 25th, at 6:30 a.m., when she was dropped off near a relative?s home, and provided with a mobile phone through which one of her interrogators called her shortly after. She was warned not to contact Karapatan, the human-rights organization that keeps track of such incidents. Carabeo was released at a later date, and given a similar warning. Jandoc is said to have reappeared but, as of this writing, has yet to contact human-rights organizations.

Roxas, a poet from Los Angeles, describes being tortured while in custody of men she has every reason to believe were military operatives (and whom she says she can identify). Handcuffed. Blindfolded. Head wrapped in a doubled-up plastic bag, nearly asphyxiating her. Beaten on the face and body. Head banged repeatedly on the wall. All the while, her torturers accused her of being a Commie and member of the New People?s Army. Her repeated requests for legal counsel were denied. From what she heard and the distance the van traveled, Roxas as well as other sources firmly believe she and her two other companions were held at nearby Fort Magsaysay.

After spending time with her family in LA to recover from her trauma, Roxas returned to Manila July 19th, accompanied by a delegation of Methodist pastors, to testify in court for a petition of the Writ of Amparo and Habeus Data, with regard to ?my abduction and torture by the Philippine military.? Understandably fearful, Roxas is under the protection of the Philippine Commission on Human Rights and its chairperson Leila De Lima. Roxas says in an e-mail that ?I am not doing this for myself. The Philippine government must be held accountable for what they did to me and thousands of other victims of human rights violations.?

Asked how she now felt about the situation in the Philippines, Roxas replied: ?It gave me a view of the human-rights situation ? that I would never have expected to have or wanted to happen to me.? She said the ordeal ?made me understand first-hand how the victims felt and what they experienced because now I am a survivor myself.? She acknowledged ?a great responsibility to tell my story. The other victims were silenced and never got to tell about their experience or seek justice for what happened. I live, I can tell my story not only to seek justice for myself but all victims of human rights violations in the Philippines.?

This abduction is only one of more than 203 known abductions that have taken place since January 2001, according to Karapatan records. The nonprofit organization has also documented human-rights violations that include 1,017 extrajudicial executions (?salvagings? in the parlance of the martial-law era), 201 involuntary disappearances, and 1,036 cases of torture. Undoubtedly there are more instances of human-rights violations that go unreported due to fear and intimidation.

Right now, the most powerful state agency in the Philippines is the military, the poisonous legacy of the Marcos regime, and it acts with impunity, an impunity in which President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo has been complicit. By participating in the Bush-initiated Global War on Terror began in the aftermath of 9/11, she has pushed forward an agenda that treats democratic processes with contempt and silences dissent, whether such dissent is democratic and peaceful or whether it comes from the barrel of a gun. It is a mindset that views all dissent a threat to the stability of the state not in the abstract but the state as she would rule it. Thus, she turns a blind eye to the military?s excesses in order to ensure its loyalty, a tenuous one, as demonstrated by two failed coup attempts, in 2003 and 2006. This is the only possible interpretation of why the Arroyo government stands by while scores of citizens it is sworn to protect?journalists, pastors, trade union leaders, human-rights advocates, student activists, etc.?are abducted, tortured, assassinated in their own homes, and otherwise disappeared.

It is why GMA has in the past praised the notorious former general Jovito Palparan, who has been linked?by the 2006 fact-finding, government-appointed Melo Commission and the Supreme Court of the Philippines, among other bodies?to numerous instances of human-rights violations in the different regions where he was the top military commander. And where is Palparan now? Not in any criminal court where one expects he should face the many charges against him, but in Congress as a party-list representative!

A 2007 report to the UN General Assembly by Special Rapporteur Phillip Alston, based on a fact-finding visit to the Philippines, points to two underlying causes for unchecked murders: the indiscriminate labeling of left-wing groups as ?front organizations? for ?armed groups whose aim is to destroy democracy,? and a government ?counter-insurgency strategy? that encourages ?the extrajudicial killings of activists and other ?enemies? in certain circumstances.? In his 2009 follow-up report, Alston emphasized the Arroyo government?s continuing failure to stem the tide of human-rights violations. Those killed include, as of the end of 2008, at least 62 journalists because of reasons directly related to their work. The Committee to Protect Journalists not surprisingly ranks the Philippines as one of the most dangerous places for its profession.

In July of 2007, the Philippine Congress passed the Human Security Act (HSA)?a virtual copy of the US Homeland Security Act?that broadens the government?s arrest-and-detention powers, and seriously undermines civil liberties. With its vague definition of what constitutes ?terrorism,? HSA essentially criminalizes political dissent. Burning an effigy, a humdrum act of protest in a democracy, or standing on the street in small groups of more than four could thus be seen as potentially terroristic and land people in jail. During the so-called 1986 People Power revolution?a restoration of the ancien regime, in my view?a politicized and corrupted military was both problem and solution. That ambivalence is at the heart of the conundrum: How does one ride a tiger without being eaten by it? When the army withdrew its support of Estrada in early 2001, people applauded, and while it seemed the right thing to do at the time, such applause sent yet another signal to the army that it had the power to replace an elected government.

A major source of funding for the AFP has been, as it has almost always been, US military aid. It currently stands at $32 million, with $2 million restricted, that is to say, to be released only when the conditions regarding the resolution of human-rights abuses are met. These funds remain restricted. This year, the US Senate proposes $33 million in military aid while the House of Representatives proposes $30 million. Various human-rights groups such as the New York Committee for Human Rights in the Philippines, Bayan-USA, and the National Alliance for Filipino Concerns have lobbied for this funding to be cut, by at least half, and that restrictive language be maintained. These groups also suggest including another condition proposed by the office of Senator Patrick Leahy: that military aid to the Philippines should be cut off while requiring the Philippine government to comply strictly with human-rights laws and a full investigation be conducted into the case of Melissa Roxas.

President Arroyo is scheduled to meet President Obama at the end of this month in Washington. For all of Obama?s talk of change, the agenda doesn?t include any discussion of the abysmal state of human-rights in the country. Their tête à tête cannot and should not be business as usual. Desirable or not, the United States does have leverage over the government of the Philippines. And while the US needs to protect its own interests, those interests would best be served if paradoxically enough the rights of Filipinos are given their due. And that means seeing the Philippines as a country of living, breathing individuals with rights and dreams of their own, rather than just a site on a map where ships, guns, and grunts can be stationed.