PRESS STATEMENTS & INTERVIEWS, 2001 - Present
Interview Series of Prof. Jose Maria Sison on "Terrorist" Tag
August 18, 2004
minimum for the GRP to start effective measures against U.S.
"Terrorist" Listing of CPP, NPA, and NDFP consultant
Dear Ka Joma,
In an ABS-CBN newsbreak item, Bebot Bello called for the return of the NDF to the negotiating table to convince the United States and the European Union to
remove the group from their terrorist blacklist.
Below is the direct quote from Bello in the said newsbreak:
"They can do something about it, and the peace talks is a good place to start. We presume that the NDF's decision to resume the peace talks with the Philippine government last February is an indication of its desire to walk the ways of peace. The continuity of the NDF's cooperation in exploring measures to address economic, social and political reforms in pursuit of just and lasting peace will be the ultimate benchmark to determine the validity of its negative labeling by other nations."
In the said newsbreak item, Bello also appealed to the US, the EU, and the Dutch government to judge the Filipino communists through their participation in the peace process.
As chief political consultant of the NDF, how would you react to Bello’s call?
August 17, 2004
sonny mallri wrote:
Channel 9 has reported that Senator Biazon is offering an “immunity from suit” to you and Ka Louie should you decide to return to the country and participate in the peace negotiation. Should GRP decided to adopt Biazon’s proposal, how would this influence the peace talks? Will you accept the offer? Well of course, this would all depend on how eager you are to return.
Reply: There is already the
GRP-NDFP Joint Agreement on Safety and Immunity Guarantees (JASIG)
which provides immunity guarantees to all persons duly-authorized
by their respective panels to participate in the GRP-NDFP peace
negotiations. JASIG is precisely one of the three agreements
violated by the US
"terrorist" listing. I explained this to you previously.
Reply: I wish the two prisoners of
war and their families the best. May they enjoy their reunion and
look forward to a better future for their country. The two
POWs were supposed to be released several months ago but
certain GRP and military officials delayed the issuance of the
SOMO and SOPO. They were uniformed soldiers captured in
the course of combat. Thus in captivity they were treated
leniently in accordance with the NPA rules, the Guide for
Establishing the People's Government, the
Geneva Conventions and the CARHRIHL.
Reply: The GRP and NDFP should
resolve the issue of "terrorist" listing in accordance with the
The Hague Joint
Dexclaration, JASIG and CARHRIHL. The US should not be allowed to
interfere in Philippine affairs and should not impose its
jurisdiction over events in the Philippines. The safety and
immunity guarantees for those participating in the peace
negotiations should be respected in accordance with the JASIG.
The Hernandez political offense doctrine should be upheld in
accordance with CARHRIHL. In a recent press statement,
Speaker Jose de Venecia offered to help in resolving the problem
posed by the renewal of the US "terrorist" listing. He is welcome
to help. It would be fine to see him. He has a track record
of helping the negotiations move forward.
Any particular message to President
Macapagal-Arroyo regarding the POW release, and the stalled peace
negotiation? Are there any low profile efforts from both parties
to conduct back channel talks to break the impasse brought by the
renewed US terrorist list?
Sonny Mallari wrote:
With the impending release of the two POWs based on "humanitarian grounds", as political consultant of the NDF, how would you want GRP to respond to the gesture aside from granting the NDF’s demand of similar freedom for political prisoners?
Reply: Aside from releasing the
political prisoners, the GRP can make a public declaration: 1.
that in accordance with The Hague Joint Declaration alleged acts
of the CPP, NPA and the NDFP chief political consultant in the
Philippines are beyond the jurisdiction of the US government,
2. that in accordance with JASIG the duly-authorized persons in
the peace negotiations are protected by safety and immunity
guarantees and 3. that in accordance with CARHRIHL anyone
chargeable for rebellion is not a common criminal or terrorist
under the Hernandez political offense doctrine. With regard to the
indemnification of the victims of HR violations under the Marcos
regime, the GRP must comply with its obligation to take executive
and legislative actions to effect prompt and proper
indemnification. It made such promises in Oslo
I and II Joint Statements.
If after the release of the POW, pinalaya din ng GRP ang ilang political prisoners (the "Mamburao 6" and the alleged killers of US Army officer James Rowe), will this change the perspective of the stalled peace negotiation?
Reply: Don't be too sure about the release of political
prisoners who have been detained on false charges of common crimes
and in violation of the Hernandez political offense doctine. The
GRP is notorious for promising such releases and reneging on the
promise. The issue of "terrorist" listing by the US can be easily
resolved as I have indicated above. But the GRP officials
prefer to make stupid statements like the US has the sovereign
right to interfere in Philippine affairs and to violate the
national sovereignty and jurisdiction of the Filipino people.
The GRP is so bankrupt morally and financially that it cannot
be trusted with the fund to indemnify the victims of HR violations
under the Marcos regime, especially now that the money has been
shifted to the General Fund of the GRP.
August 14, 2004
Is there any correlation between the resurgence of violence against media practitioner and the adamant stance of the GRP not to lift a finger on US terrorist tag on the revolutionary movement and yourself?
Curious lang ako.
Reply: Indications are that those killing media practitioners are politicians in power, who use both military personnel and private armed bodyguards as killers. These murderous reactionary politicians are in the main aligned with the GMA regime. They are afflicted with overweening arrogance towards the media and the people. This arrogance can also be seen in the collaboration of the GMA regime with the US with regard to the "terrorist" listing of revolutionaries.
The GMA regime is arrogant towards the people but it is subservient to the US as it fails to speak and act against the US violation of national sovereignty and jurisdiction of the Filipino people and interference in Philippine affairs. Also consider the transgression of the safety and immunity guarantees for duly authorized personsin the peace negotiations (like the NDFP chief political consultant) and disrespect for the Hernandez political offense doctrine. The GMA regime is so servile to the US that it allows the latter to sabotage the peace negotiations.
Should the GRP still choose not exert any effort to help de-list the CPP-NPA and yourself from the US terrorist list, what is the next option for the revolutionary movement? From what I barely heard from you in the ANC television interview…"babalik naman sa all out civil war?"
Reply: The operative term of the NDFP now is postponement of next round of formal talks of the GRP and NDFP panels. That is to give the GRP a chance to comply with obligations in the Oslo I and Oslo II Joint Statements of February 14 and April 3, 2004 respectively. If the GRP fails to comply with its obligations after so long, then the postponement can become suspension. Further on, suspension can lead to termination of peace negotiations. There are evil elements within the
GMA regime who are extremely subservient to the US and wish to wage all-out war in the vain hope of destroying the people's democratic government and revolutionary mass movement.
Even with the US terrorist list around, are there no other roads left to peace?
Reply: So long as the US "terrorist" list persists, it is obvious that the shared malicious counterrevolutionary objective of the US and the GMA regime is to intimidate the NDFP negotiators, consultants and other duly-authorized persons in the peace negotiations, obscure the roots of the civil war and destroy the revolutionary movement. The NDFP is not willing to negotiate under duress. The duress comes from the evil character of the "terrorist" tag and all its malicious consequences. Under the circumstances, the people themselves demand the intensification of the new democratic revolution through protracted people's war.
As far as I am concerned, when I have no more work as chief political consultant of the NDFP, I will concentrate on writing books and poems and singing songs on people"s democratic revolution as the road to a just and lasting peace of national liberation, democracy and social progress.