The Supreme Court of the Philippines has issued a landmark ruling explicitly defining 'red-tagging' as an act that threatens an individual's constitutional rights to life, liberty, and security. This definition was provided in a 39-page decision authored by Associate Justice Rodil Zalameda. The court's decision, which granted a writ of amparo to a red-tagged activist, marks the first time a Philippine court has explicitly defined red-tagging, providing a legal basis for individuals to challenge such accusations. The court described red-tagging as involving the use of threats and intimidation to discourage perceived subversive activities.
In a 39-page decision penned by Associate Justice Rodil Zalameda, the High Court defined red-tagging as an act that threatens a person’s constitutional right to life, liberty, and security. https://t.co/ACaWcXLVGG https://t.co/ohFFJW94tU
The Philippine Supreme Court rules “red-tagging” -- accusing individuals and groups of supporting the communist insurgency -- threatens people’s life, liberty, and security. It is used to harass, threaten, and at times assault or kill government critics. https://t.co/qLFAzC7Ftz
Rappler Talk: How does SC’s red-tagging ruling change the game https://t.co/57YGfHoqYw
In this episode, justice reporter Jairo Bolledo speaks with National Union of Peoples' Lawyers president Ephraim Cortez to discuss how the SC ruling can benefit those targeted by red-tagging. https://t.co/tVkj2u7NiS
The Supreme Court finally defines red-tagging. This was the first time that a Philippine court has explicitly defined red-tagging – providing a legal basis for individuals who will challenge the act. Full story: https://t.co/zYtldcYEts https://t.co/T4CCMh6bNs
Finally, Supreme Court defines red-tagging as a threat https://t.co/TtBD3FPr8H via @rapplerdotcom
In a 39-page decision penned by Associate Justice Rodil Zalameda, the High Court defined red-tagging as an act that threatens a person’s constitutional right to life, liberty, and security. https://t.co/9c1uOueh8q https://t.co/2ngQMwSCy6
Finally, Supreme Court defines red-tagging as a threat https://t.co/ILXFaS0XOa
In its decision, the High Court says inherent to red-tagging is the "use of threats and intimidation to discourage 'subversive' activities." https://t.co/9nwxDpBbZ7
Finally, the Supreme Court explicitly defined and explained what red-tagging is. Past decisions involving red-tagging cases did not give explicit definitions. The SC gave the definition in granting the writ of amparo – or protection – to a red-tagged activist. @rapplerdotcom https://t.co/B6GWK9mrD4