MANILA, Philippines — Questions for National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperson are piling up as Supreme Court justices again brought up Lt. Gen. Antonio Parlade’s repeated red-tagging in the ongoing oral arguments on the petitions against the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020.
Associate Justice Amy Lazaro-Javier in Tuesday’s setting noted that Parlade, a ranking military officer and spokesperson of the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict, accused Gabriela and Kabataan party-list, which have consistently won seats in the Congress, of being fronts to the Communist Party of the Philippines.
Related Stories
A proscription petition against the CPP and its armed wing New People’s Army pending before the courts but the Anti-Terrorism Council had designated them as terrorists.
“When the spokesperson give statements linking a group to the CPP-NPA does he do so in his official capacity as spokesperson or are these statements simply his personal opinions?” Lazaro-Javier asked.
Assistant Solicitor General Marissa Galandines said since Parlade is a private citizen, he has freedom of expression. She added that Parlade’s posts are his personal opinions and not the official position of the government.
This was also the OSG’s position when it submitted its comment on petitioners’ pleading that asked the SC to compel Parlade to explain a Facebook post which retired Senior Associate Justice Antonio Carpio said is a “clear threat” to them.
Lazaro-Javier pressed: “You are also a general, an assistant solicitor general, and the head of OSG is also a general. You are the lawyer of the government. Are you authorized to disavow the statements of the spokesperson?”
In the end, Galandines fended off questions on Palade’s red-tagging to National Security Adviser Hermogenes Esperon.
“May we be allowed, we submit that these are factual matters involving the AFP and NTF-ELCAC and submit that the NSA [Esperon] can better answer,” she told the justice
Cannot overrule Parlade
But Associate Justice Marvic Leonen, in his separate interpellation, cited the case of an unnamed “military person” who does not answer to the chain of command.
Leonen noted: “This is the first time that I heard that a military person, even a colonel or general, does not answer to the chain of command, does not have that discipline and cannot be told ‘you cannot say that because you belong to the institution’. You want to say that get out of the institution first.”
He added he cannot criticize the SC without disrobing first.
When Parlade was in hot water for his continued red-tagging in March, Lt. Gen. Cirilito Sobejana said the Armed Forces of the Philippines has “no way” to overrule Parlade’s statements as NTF-ELCAC spokesperson.
Leonen added: “For as long as you are in government and you speak something, and if that speech is made in relation to an Executive agent, and there is only one Executive, then don’t you think that is also the voice of the Executive.”
He continued: “Unless the Executive says, Be quiet. Hindi mo pwede sabihin yan, hindi ko policy yan.’ Gusto mo sabihin yan. You want your personal freedom of expression, you go out of government first’.”
The oral arguments will resume, for its eighth setting, on Wednesday, 2:30 p.m.
Other magistrates, including Associate Justice Rosmari Carandang, had earlier said they have questions for Esperon.
Senior Associate Justice Estela Perlas-Bernabe and Chief Justice Alexander Gesmundo have yet to grill the petitioners. After the SC wraps up its interpellation of government lawyers, retired Chief Justice Reynato Puno and retired Associate Justice Francis Jardeleza, designated amici curiae (friends of court), will deliver their statements.