Bucking an Anti-Terror Law

August 20, 2007

He announced in Tagalog: “This is serious. You are with the Taliban.” The roomful of people at the airport in Manila glanced at us askance. I wished that the Taliban would discover the Philippines government had linked them to one Jewish feminist, one left-wing writer/advocate for women’s rights (me) and one national chairperson of a progressive women’s organization. Hopefully, they would take offense and place those responsible on their list. This was August 14, nine days after Dr. Annalisa Enrile, GABRIELA Network national chairperson, was refused an exit visa, her luggage off-loaded, and was told to get clearance from the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation (BID). Judith Mirkinson (Mirk) and I—also members of the Philippines-United States women’s solidarity organization, GABNet—had insisted that she re-book on the same day and time as our flight. Terrorizing three women would be more of a problem than terrorizing one. All three of us had attended the 10th Women’s International Solidarity Affair in the Philippines, along with 29 other GABNet members. The bi-annual affair, hosted by the GABRIELA Philippines (GABPhil), usually drew several hundred women from a dozen or more countries. Dr. Enrile had gone to the BID for clearance. It sent her to the Department of Justice, which sent her to the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency, which sent her back to BID. The “watch list,” “black list” and “hold-order list” were rigmarole, intended to cause maximum psychological damage, with neither administrative nor legal recourse for resolution. The “listed” became dependent on the whims of the four agencies’ personnel. Whispers about a back-door exit for five million pesos ($100,000) reached us. This then was the nature of the Human Security Act, recently approved by Philippines President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. Under the HSA, a person can be held on mere suspicion of terrorism, which is defined as both action and inaction meant to create fear and chaos among the general population. The excuse for the HSA is the so-called war on terror but its reason for being was obvious to us: to terrorize critics of her administration and to destroy international sisterhood and solidarity. Once certain we were also “listed,” both Mirk and I decided to go public, to show that Dr. Enrile’s case was neither accidental nor isolated, that GABNet had been targeted as a test HSA case. We worked at becoming visible victims. At the launch of the illustrated Sugar & Salt (a story published in Ms. magazine) at a Jesuit university bookstore, I confessed I was listed. A question followed the momentary silence in the packed room: what I would do if I were not allowed to leave. I said I was, right there and then, announcing my candidacy for the presidency of the Philippines. The audience cheered. We tried to be of good spirits, despite each passing day’s worry over professional commitments at home in the United States. We wanted to frustrate the listing’s intent—to sow fear among human rights advocates and activists already feeling the impact of nearly a thousand political assassinations, 90 of them women. We knew that GABNet was mobilizing. Twelve hours after its call for support, 300 protest faxes flooded the U.S. embassy. Telephone calls, e-mails and statements poured in from the United States, Canada and Europe; protest vigils were already scheduled in four cities. GABPhil, Gabriela Women’s Party (GWP) and GABNet members still in the country held long meetings and ran through possible scenarios, which deteriorated rapidly for me. First scenario: Mirk and I would be let through and Dr. Enrile detained; second scenario: Mirk and Dr. Enrile would be allowed to go and I detained; third scenario: the two are allowed to go and I’m arrested; fourth scenario: I’m targeted for assassination. GABPhil took this seriously enough to assign me a “buddy”—a young woman, who, I hoped, could dismantle enemy bones at a single bound. To render the worldwide protests visible, GABPhil picketed the BID at noon of August 14, joined by some Comfort Women (survivors of kidnapping and rape organized by Japanese occupation forces during World War II). Then 30 women, wearing red t-shirts with the slogan “Assert Women’s Rights,” took us to the airport where media and television crews waited. We were mobbed, especially with the presence of GWP Congresswoman Liza Maza. GAB women held up sheets of paper printed with calls for our release. To no avail, it seemed. After 40 minutes arguing with a “lowly” clerk who muttered that he could only follow orders, the immigration supervisor showed up, hollering we were Taliban. While arguing with him, we kept an eye on the queue, because two women—one also listed, another a GABNet member—were lining up for exit visas. We raised our decibel, with Congresswoman Maza successfully insisting on bringing our legal counsel, Alnie Foja, into the restricted area. We kept saying we had been assured that the hold-order had been lifted; please find a higher authority; search desks in various offices, and so forth. Congresswoman Maza was formidable. Attorney Foja was formidable. When the two young women in the queue slipped through without mishap, I breathed again. Suddenly, the “lift the hold-order order” was found, sitting ignored for four hours on a desk. Such was the power of women that the hold-order was lifted not just for us, but for all 500 names. We sent off text messages to the GAB women still waiting outside. Our passports were stamped. Nirvana! A media photographer asked for a last picture. We lined up and, just before the flash, raised fists of defiance. The immigration supervisor yelped. A final weirdness: as my hand-carries were searched at the entry to the boarding area, the security agent saw two one-dollar bills in my purse. I should take care of my money, he said. I took the money out, saying they were only dollar bills. He asked in a wheedling voice, if I would take pity on an hourly wager and give him the money. I said, “And what? Be charged with bribery?” He said no; that I could place the money this way and he would slip it out. A security agent was begging me for two dollars! How much money, I wondered, would the HSA generate for the corrupt?

Update: Philippines Congresswoman Liza Largoza Maza’s congressional speech, (August 22, 2007) Madam Speaker, I rise on a matter of personal and collective privilege. This concerns the Bureau of Immigration hold departure order on the Chairperson of GABRIELA Network U.S.A. and the Philippine government's watchlist where her name and that of the two others appeared and itsimplication on the Gabriela Women's Party, which I represent. Madam Speaker, on August 3-5, 2007, the GABRIELA national alliance held its 10th Women's International Solidarity Affair in the Philippines or WISAP. Three of the participants who attended the international solidarity affair were Dr. Annalisa Enrile, chairperson of the GABRIELA Network U.S.A., award-winning and internationally acclaimed novelist and member of the GABNET U.S.A. Ms. Ninotchka Rosca, and human rights advocate and also a member of the GABNET U.S.A, Ms. Judith Mirkinson. Dr. Annaliza Enrile, a U.S. citizen and a professor at the College of Social Work of the University of Southern California, came earlier than the scheduled WISAP. With her were her 25 social work students who joined the field experience program of the subject "Feminist Theory and Social Change" which Dr. Enrile was coordinating as part of the social work curriculum of her University. She was also accompanied by another professor who helped her coordinate the program. Dr. Enrile, her professor collegue and her students came here to learn from the situation of the people especially the women. During their stay, they visited Banawe, the University of the Philippines College of Social Work, went to urban poor and rural communities, learned about human rights in the country, listened to lectures on feminism, social work and social change, visited the House of Representatives and attended the WISAP as part of their exposure and learning experience. Ms. Ninotchka Rosca, on the other hand, was here to attend the GABRIELA WISAP, to launch her new book, and to visit her 96-year old mother. While Ms. Judith Mirkinson who was also a delegate to the WISAP was tasked by the National Lawyers League of the U.S. to follow up on the work of the U.S. women lawyers who came to the Philippines last year to look into the human rights situation of women and the people. Madam Speaker, On August 5, 2007, Dr. Enrile checked in for her flight back to Los Angeles. After Dr. Enrile paid her terminal fee, she proceeded to the immigration booth to have her passport exit-stamped. She was told by the immigration officer that she could not leave the country because she was on the watchlist and that she should get a clearance from the Bureau of Immigration and Deportation or BID. The Immigration Officer returned her passport and her boarding pass with the words "offloaded" written on it. The next day, Dr. Enrile, went to the BID, where she was told to file an affidavit of denial because the name on the watchlist did not have her middle name nor a birth date on it. Realizing that this was something serious, she sought a lawyer to help her prepare the affidavit. She tried to file the affidavit at the BID but then she was told to get a clearance from the Department of Justice or DOJ. Exhausted, she asked her lawyer friend to help her get the clearance. At the DOJ, her lawyer was told to get a clearance for Dr. Enrile from the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency or NICA. At the NICA, the lawyer was told to go back to the BID. When they went back to the BID, the bureau told them to go to the DOJ. From the very start that she was told she was on the watchlist and not allowed to leave the country, no reason was given to her why she was on the watchlist and why she needs clearance from these agencies. Without any apparent reason given, but by virtue of a watchlist, the BID did not allow her to leave. Instead she was given the run around. Clueless, Dr. Enrile rushed from one agency to another like a headless chicken just so she can clear her name and leave the country. Dr. Enrile was prevented from going home to her family and celebrating her wedding anniversary with her husband and to her teaching job in the United States which commenced on August 8, jeopardizing her chances of retaining her position in the University. Article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that everyone has the right to leave any country, including his/her own and to return to his/her country. Clearly, this is a blatant violation of Dr. Enrile's right to travel. Ms. Mirkinson and Ms. Rosca came to know that they were also on the watchlist when Dr. Enrile and Ms. Mirkinson went to the U.S. Embassy to seek their assistance, they being U.S. Citizens, and learned from the Embassy that indeed they were on the watchlist including Ms. Rosca. Madam Speaker, since the approval and start of the implementation of the Human Security Act, this is the first time that we again heard of this watchlist. There were reports, in fact Ms. Mirkinson asked the U.S. Embassy about this, that during the U.S. Senate hearing on the human rights situation in the Philippines, the issue of the watchlist was raised and that Senator Barbara Boxer of the U.S. Congress Committee on Foreign Relations was assured by the representative of the Philippine government that the watchlist which the Arroyo government made in line with the ASEAN summit in December 2006 and in January 2007 was no longer in effect. At this time the Human Security Act was not yet signed into law. But with the hold departure order of Dr. Enrile, the watchlist came into the fore once again. Madam Speaker, what are the government's bases for people to be included in the watchlist? As far as we know, a person is put on the watchlist or blacklist and barred from leaving the country or entering a country if she or he has committed a crime or the person was notorious for illegal activities. In the case of the three GABNET USA women, there were no charges filed against them that would warrant them to be in the watchlist. Madam Speaker, we can only think of one thing why this happened to Dr. Enrile. We surmise that this is the Human Security Act at work and the watchlist that is now being used against the three women is the Human Security Act watchlist. This was in fact confirmed when I accompanied Dr. Enrile, Ms. Rosca and Ms. Mirkinson last August 14 to the international airport who were scheduled to depart in the evening for the U.S. Again they were held for sometime at the immigration because the names of the three women were still in the watchlist. I asked for the copy of the order and the watchlist and saw that the three were in the watchlist because they were suspected of having links with the Talibans, an alleged terrorist organization. Mr. Speaker, this is utterly preposterous. We condemn thisgovernment for arbitrarily putting the names of the GABNET women in the watchlist on suspicion that they may have links with the Talibans. Madam Speaker, these three women are part of the GABRIELA solidarity network for Filipino women's concerns and they are human rights advocates. They are respected in their own fields of work and have conducted women to women solidarity activities against trafficking in women and against all forms of violence on women and human rights violations. On mere suspicion, they were put in the watch list and damage has been done to their reputation as well as to their work. For what reasons then were they suspected of having links with the Talibans? We construed that perhaps because the three were part of the organizers of the All-women US Lawyer's Human Rights Mission in the Philippines last year during the height of the implementation of the Presidential Proclamation 1017. But since when did looking into the human rights situation of any country become a crime or a terrorist activity? The United Nations in fact has set up mechanism for monitoring and reporting of human rights violations. Why is it then that investigating human rights situation in the Philippines, if this was the case, became a basis for the watchlist. I ask now, Madam Speaker, are the three GABNET USA women suspected of having connections with the Talibans because of their work as women's rights defenders? And because they are suspected of having links with the Talibans and they are our network, is the government primarily the Human Security Act Anti-Terrorism Council now implying that the Gabriela Women's Party and GABRIELA national alliance have links with the Taliban as well and therefore we are also in the watchlist? Or is mere association with GABRIELA, a staunch critic of the Arroyo administration now entitles one to be on the Anti-Terrorism Council watchlist? This is unconscionable! Since when did people to people or women to women solidarity against trafficking in women, violence against women and human rights violations become a terrorist act? If this was Human Security Act at work, then this was a clear demonstration of the horrendous powers of the Human Security Act that the government could use and abuse against our people. May I ask Madam Speaker, has the Philippine government issued directives to all our Embassies abroad to bar people especially women from entering the country and have internship with GABRIELA? Are we now a proscribed organization that visitors of GABRIELA are being prohibited from connecting with us. Or is the government paving the way for our proscription under the Human Security Act? We strongly condemn this political harassment. This is violative of our rights to peacefully organize and develop solidarity with women around the world. Madam Speaker, the Human Security Act patterned after the U.S. Patriot Act has emboldened the Anti-Terrorism Council to politically harass critics, spread its repressive tentacles beyond borders and undermine the universally held principle of international solidarity. Increasingly, Madam Speaker, the draconian nature of the Human Security Act is unfolding before us and this has serious implications on our overseas workers and foreigners who would like to visit our country. It also has serious implications on the overseas constituents of Gabriela Women's Party. It will be noted, Madam Speaker, that Gabriela Women's Party topped the overseas absentee voting this 2007 elections. This is sending a danger signal to our overseas Filipinos that at any time they can be suspects of having links with any terrorist organization and put in the watchlist, or blacklist or put on hold departure order by just being members of Gabriela Women's Party or by being associated with us, or even as their purpose is just to visit their families and friends. Madam Speaker, human rights work and international solidarity of peoples are imperiled by the Human Security Act. Most important it undermines the human rights and put the lives of innocent people especially women in danger. Madam Speaker, as I speak before this body now, friends of the GABRIELA network have been protesting in the United States. Some have already contacted some of the members of the Senate as well as the US State Department. International solidarity support for the three women, Dr. Enrile, Ms. Rosca and Ms. Mirkinson are pouring in as shown in the hundreds of faxes and emails that the U.S. embassy has already received. Madam Speaker, upon the GABRIELA Philippines insistence and the steadfast resolve of the three women to push for their right to travel and leave the country, the watchlist order was lifted on August 14 on the same afternoon that the GABNET three was scheduled to depart for the U.S. Apparently the Philippine government saw that this issue will explode on its face and will put the Human Security Act in a bad light even as the law itself foretells of human rights violations under the guise of protecting national security. But even as the three GABNET women have already left the country, I urge the House of Representatives to investigate the existence of the Human Security Act watchlist and why GABRIELA network members are included in this list and the arbitrariness of including human rights defenders and international solidarity workers in the watchlist. I urge this Congress to uphold international solidarity and intervene in the removal of human rights defenders and international solidarity workers in the watchlist, blacklist and all listings that will violate their rights to travel and those rights that will hinder their work as human rights defenders and that will hinder the genuine spirit of international solidarity. Finally, as we work on these proposals, I urge this Congress to look again into the Human Security Act and call for its immediate repeal if we are to uphold and protect human rights and prevent a repeat of what happened to the GABNET three. Thank you, Madam Speaker and distinguished colleagues.