Home > Op-ed | To bottom

Checkpoint

I joined the Baguio delegates for the trip to Buanao, Malibcong, Abra where the 21st Cordillera Day was celebrated. That was in the early morning of April 22 where 10 jeeps from Baguio braved the long and rugged road to that upland community. Along the way, we witnessed the very limited, if not the total absence, of social services: rugged roads, absence of bridges and other infrastructure projects, absence of health services, among others.

On our way to Buanao, a checkpoint manned by members of the Philippine Army along the highway in Narvacan, Ilocos Sur stopped all passing vehicles. They conducted “plain view” inspection, using flashlights. Though the checkpoint happened during early morning where the vicinity was still dark, it was conducted under the context of “plain view.”

A memorable experience related on check point happened when we were on our way home on April 25. We encountered “plain view searches” in two checkpoints. The first check point was along the Kalinga–Abra road in Baay-Licuan and the second, along the Kalinga – Abra road in Lagangilang. Both Baay-Licuan and Lagangilang are municipalities of Abra.

In the first check point, at least four members of the Philippine Army stopped all the jeepneys of the delegates to the Cordillera Day. A soldier in full battle gear approached our jeep. The soldier approached one of our companions in the jeep who was recording the incident on video, saying “Bawal yan,” referring on the video camera. I thought the warning was because my companion covered his face with a tubao, a Muslim scarf. Another companion politely asked, why? I brought out my press identification and answered that we are from the press. The soldier refrained from further questioning my companion.

Our jeep was actually occupied mostly by journalists from Baguio, in fact members of the NUJP (National Union of Journalists of the Philippines), classified by the ISAFPs PowerPoint entitled “Knowing the enemy” as influenced by the CPP/NPA/NDF. We decided to park our jeep while waiting for the other jeeps which were being searched. What caught my attention was when another soldier ordered at least three men on top of the jeep to step down. The sole reason: they wore combat boots. The soldier insisted that using army boots is prohibited. It was not only ignorance from the soldier or the true nature of our military. What is prohibited by the Revised Penal Code is the total use of military uniform and if the user pretends that he is a member of the peace keeping force – whether the Police or the AFP. But in this case, the men just used their combat boots and the soldiers consider it a crime based on their unwritten rule.

Our second experience was also a notable one. Our jeep was stopped at the checkpoint at the Abra-Kalinga road in Lagangilang. It was manned by members of the 41st IB, same Infantry Battalion that manned checkpoint in Baay-Licuan. In the said checkpoint, a civilian clothed member of the military was the one conducting the “plain view” search. Upon approaching us at the back, I informed him we’re members of the media. I asked him what the problem was, again I showed my press ID. He answered it was a normal activity and signaled us to proceed. Again, we were at least respected because we are members of the media.

I later learned that the member of the checkpoint guys tried to pinpoint a passenger an “enemy of the state,” meaning the NPA. It is possible, according to a friend, that the army in civilian was actually a surrenderee, a former NPA, who is now being used for counter-insurgency by the AFP.

Our experiences concretized that law and order is not a reality in the province. It is the members of the Army and their guns that rule the provinces especially in the remotest area. And since most of the villagers are unaware of their basic constitutional rights, the Army can assert their military power. The civilians would not assert their courage, even if they are aware of their rights, because of fear that they might lose their dear lives.

Our experiences illustrated the NUJP position against the anti-terrorism bill pending in Congress. In that bill, merely interviewing groups that might have a position differing from the government can be considered a supporter of a terrorist group. The bill curtails press freedom, freedom of expression, and the right to information as we are only to air the views favorable to the government.
Even at present when the civilian is supposedly supreme over the military, it is too hard to assert one’s rights. How much more in a situation that an anti-terror law justifies military intervention over the civilian? #

Home > Op-ed | Back to top