Twenty years into the fight for an anti-discrimination legislation, gender equality and human rights lawyers stressed the need for a law that would protect the LGBTQI+ community from sexual orientation, gender identity, and gender expression (SOGIE) discrimination. 

“[J]ust last year, Metro Manila Pride recorded 70,000 attendees. For the most part we thought that it’s a sign of society’s increased support for the community…[b]ut have we really achieved acceptance?” Atty. Claire de Leon said yesterday, June 27. 

The Gretchen Diez incident last year, according to Atty. De Leon, “drastically” shifted the perception of the public toward the LGBTQI+ community and the ongoing fight for the SOGIE Equality bill. 

Misconceptions surfaced after the incident that was followed by a “massive” misinformation campaign against the bill. 

“[N]akakalungkot na marami ding nagbabangga ng mga karapatan natin sa karapatan ng ibang sector. Nakakalungkot na ang ibang tao iniisip nila na this bill would take away rights from heterosexuals or cisgender persons,” Atty. De Leon said. 

However, she stressed that protecting the rights of a marginalized sector does not take away the rights of another.

“[I]f you think that allowing a sector to exercise their rights would take away the rights of others, [then] we must rethink how we see rights [and] how we understand rights,” she said. 

Anti-discrimination ordinances in LGUs

The lack of SOGIE-based national laws pushed LGBTQI+ groups to fight for anti-discrimination ordinances (ADO) within the local government units. 

Marikina Mayor Marcelino Teodoro announced last year, June 29, the passage of the city’s ADO during the Metro Manila Pride March. 

Quezon City on the other hand passed on November 28, 2014 the Gender Fair Ordinance, which was authored by Councilor Mayen Juico and was signed by the then-mayor Herbert Bautista.

Despite having implementing rules and regulations (IRRs) and ordinances, Atty. De Leon said that the process is not entirely implemented and effective. 

“May council [at] may members of the council pero walang office…[N]a-highlight lang nito na hindi natatapos ang lobbying, hindi natatapos ang laban natin sa pagpasa ng ordinance,” De Leon said. 

“Kailangan nating ma-push na meron IRRs at also kailangan nating ma-make sure na nai-implement talaga ang mga ordinances na ‘to,” she added. 

De Leon said that laws and initiatives against anti-discrimination, whether from the national government, LGUs, or private sectors, are necessary to build a more inclusive community.

“Discrimination still occurs and as long as discrimination under the basis of SOGIE persists, we need a law that would give us protection…[p]rotection must be available and accessible to each of us regardless of our SOGIE,” she said. 

SOGIE and Anti-terror bills

According to Atty. Eljay Bernardo, the “bigness” and vague provisions of the Anti-Terrorism Bill can directly affect the LGBTQI+ community as a marginalized sector fighting for SOGIE bill. 

“If we request government, demand government of our rights, it could be construed as terrorism, as destabilization,” Atty. Bernardo said.

The imprisonment of the Pride20, according to him, uncovered how the law can be “twisted” against freedom of speech and assembly. 

Last Friday, June 26, 10 members of LGBTQI+ rights group Bahaghari along with eight from other progressive groups, and two drivers were detained at the Manila Police District. 

They were being charged with disobedience of persons in authority in relation to Republic Act 11332, or the Law on Reporting of Communicable Disease and Batas Pambansa 880, or the Public Assembly Act.

Atty. Bernardo said that the bill could put burden in LGBTQI+ groups, which could be an excuse to put the members of these groups under the surveillance of an anti-terrorism council. 

According to Atty. De Leon, the Anti-Terror bill could “silence all of us,” especially the marginalized sector. 

“[F]or us when activism is the only way of asserting our narratives, this can further render us voiceless. It seems like wala naman siyang direct effect, pero the dangers of it ay nararamdaman na natin ngayon,” she said. 

The webinar #PrideHangouts 02: Tuloy ang Laban para sa SOGIE Equality was hosted by Pat Bringas and was organized by Metro Manila Pride.

Comments

Human rights lawyer and former Bayan Muna representative Neri Colmenares put emphasis on the vague definitions included in the Anti-Terror Bill in an online forum held Saturday, June 6.

These broad definitions, according to Colmenares, could be dangerous, especially that Section 26 requires the formation of an Anti-Terror Council (ATC). 

“[I]t’s an executive body eh at ang mga members niyan ay mga executive officials, mga bataan ni President Duterte. Puwede kang i-designate na terorista,” he said during the Martial Law Noon, Terror Bill Ngayon webinar.

The Section 29 of the bill, as explained by Colmenares, will allow the ATC to “issue a written authorization that allows the police to arrest an alleged suspect” and detain him up to 24 days. 

“Ang term nila sa batas written authorization, but essentially it’s a warrant. It grants the police the power and the authority to arrest you eh…[H]indi naman judiciary ‘yun,” Colmenares said. 

Lawyer Tony La Viña believes these provisions to be “unconstitutional” and could go after legitimate movements and actions and be colored or linked to terrorism.

“‘Yung terrorist, ‘yun ‘yung nagbobomba, nagpapatay ng walang kahulugan. The violence is simply intended for chaos, simply for destruction of the society. The old definition [in Human Security Act] did not respect that distinction. Mas lalo na ngayon [sa Anti-Terror Bill], 

“Nagdagdag ng mga crimes tulad ng inciting to terrorism, support of terrorism, proposal to commit terrorism—lahat ‘yan are all acts that we can actually do on a day to day basis sa pakikibaka…[P]uwedeng kulayin at kulayan ng gobyerno at sabihing ‘terrorism ‘yan’ or ‘inciting to terrorism ‘yan,” La Viña said.

The judicial authority in the Anti-Terror Bill, according to La Viña, is “much less rigorous”  in safeguarding on abuses, rights to privacy in communication, personal security, and unreasonable searches and seizures. 

The bill will also remove the jurisdiction of the Commission on Human Rights to prosecute human rights-related crimes. 

Colmenares sees the recent protests against the passage of the bill as “reasonable” despite being in the middle of a pandemic, as it shows the disapproval of many Filipinos to the bill. 

“[T]andaan natin na sa kasaysayan natin, ang pinakamalaking tagumpay ng sambayanang Pilipino ay nakamit natin sa gitna ng pinakamasidhing krisis. Kaya tama lang ang ginagawa nating paglaban. Resonable ito [upang] maipanaig ang pagtutol ng sambayanang Pilipino na maisabatas itong new Terror Law,” Colmenares said.

Marcos’ ‘new society’ now the ‘new normal’

Martial law survivors warned the public of the parallelism between the provisions of the Anti-Terror Bill and the abuses during the martial law period in the Philippines. 

Former Department of Social Welfare and Development secretary Prof. Judy Taguiwalo said that the “new normal” today is somewhat similar to the Marcosian “new society.”

“[Sa] new normal makikita natin [ang] mas matinding kawalan ng trabaho, mas matinding kakulangan sa kalusugan, mas hirap sa edukasyon, at milyong mga OFWs ang babalik. So paano ‘yan haharapin?,

“[N]andyan na [ang] undeclared martial law…[N]gayon kahit walang kaso hinuhuli, ikinukulong,” Taguiwalo said. 

Bagong Alyansang Makabayan Chairperson Dr. Karol Araullo said that the bill intends “to silence criticism, critical thinking, and opposition.”

“Ayokong tawaging Anti-Terror Bill eh kasi sa totoo lang, it is a bill intended to terrorize the people into submission sa mga patakaran na hindi makabubuti sa kanila,” Araullo said.

To avoid the repetition of the 1972 martial law, Araullo said the limitations in the imposition of martial law was included in the 1987 Constitution.

“[T]hey want to carry out ‘yung ganyang klaseng panunupil on a wider scale which they are unable to do under the current laws…[S]o inimbento nilang itong Anti-Terror Bill,” she said. John Aaron Pangilinan

Comments

Media professionals gathered yesterday in a webinar, “#CAMPJOURN: Campus and Community Journalism in a Time of Pandemic,” to encourage campus journalists to report the truth despite the changing journalism landscape.

GMA7 news broadcast journalist Atom Araullo highlighted the importance of the balance in reporting and power in storytelling.

“Sa trabaho natin, napakahalaga na nakukuha natin yung tamang impormasyon… But you also have to make sure that yung information mo is something that will illuminate kung ano yung katotohanan,” he said during the online forum.

Araullo said that it is not enough to present the facts, and as journalists it is part of the responsibility to reveal the truth behind the facts and make it into a story in which the audience can relate to.

“People say that there are two sides of a story. That’s true,” he said. “Pero the truth is just one thing. There is just one objective reality.”

Department of Education Bureau of Curriculum Development Director Jocelyn Andaya told campus journalists to “keep writing.” 

She stressed that during the ongoing pandemic, there is a need for a purpose and this is the time in which correct and fact-checked news stories are needed. 

“[D]on’t just write because you want to this time,” she said. “Sometimes I was told by campus journalists…’it takes courage to defy,’…It takes courage, but defiance has to be tempered with correct information.”

“You have to make sure that what you write about is true,” she said. 

Emotion in news stories

Journalists, according to Araullo, are not just robots gathering information, which means that emotions and critical thinking are two factors to be considered and taken advantage of when writing a story. 

“Bilang journalist, yung personal feelings mo, hindi mo ‘yan mahihiwalay sa eventual story na gagawin mo,” he said “[Y]ou can be an effective journalist even if you acknowledge…na ikaw ay isang tao na mayoong emosyon at mayroong panindigan.”

Araullo considers emotions as a “good thing” when it comes to projecting news because the act of feeling, for him, gives the journalist an idea of the plight of the ordinary citizens. 

“Kahit na anong pilit, kahit na anong subok mo, at kahit na lokohin mo yung sarili mo na kaya mong gawin ‘yon, it’s not possible kasi you have to make choices along the way.” he said.

“[Y]ou have to choose how to write it. With all of those choices, you are already shaping the story,” he added.

Araullo emphasized that there is also the need to consider other fundamentals of journalism like accuracy and balance and the importance of putting context in stories. 

“[A]no ba yung surrounding situation na kinalalagyan nitong mga facts na ito? Sigurado ba ‘ko na yung facts na ito ay hindi cherry-picked?” he said.

Issue to impact

Araullo said stories should not only induce feelings of happiness, sadness, or anger, but also urge the citizens “to find solutions necessary to make change.”

To do that, he said that journalists must hone their storytelling prowess, “from stories to solutions, from issues to impact, ” and create connection with the audience.

“[N]aghahanap ka ng isang paraan na maintindihan ng audience na kahit na hindi siya yung nakakaranas nitong istoryang ‘to, nararamdaman niya kung anong epekto nito doon sa nakakaranas ng istorya,” he said.

Additionally, Internews media specialist Kat Raymundo emphasized the “framework of accountability.” 

Media, according to her, serves as a “tool” that could either be helpful or used for political reasons, which is why journalists must use it to empower people to provide for their needs.

“[W]e must restore public trust and credibility, and journalism in a changing world must work on self-regulation and social responsibility,” she said. 

Raymundo urged the budding journalists to stop being “passive consumers” of news and instead make use of the old and new media as an “informed citizen” who interacts with other media users.

“Let’s be aware, complain, or even [encourage] criticism, because media development will not happen if the public does not demand more from this powerful institution,” she said. Coleen Ruth Abiog and Jayziel Khim Budino

Comments