* Category includes ratification, accession, or succession to the treaty

Fundamental freedoms such as freedom of expression, freedom of peaceable assembly, and freedom of association are protected under Article III (Bill of Rights) of the 1987 Philippine Constitution.

Section 4 of the Bill of Rights provides that “no law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

Access to information on matters of public concern is provided in Section 7 of the same Article. This right is subject to limitations as may be provided by law. Currently, there is no national legislation on the access to information. Limitations are culled from jurisprudence, rules, and regulations. Included are privileged communication and information pertaining to national security and sensitive diplomatic matters. In 2016, departments, offices, and agencies under the executive branch were mandated to create their own People’s Freedom of Information Manuals by President Rodrigo Duterte through Executive Order No. 02.

The people’s right to association is protected under Section 8 of Article III. Section 8 states: “The right of the people, including those employed in the public and private sectors, to form unions, associations, or societies for purposes not contrary to law shall not be abridged.” The right to self-organization for government employees is reiterated in Section 2(5) of Article IX-B.

Section 15, Article XIII mandates the State to “respect the role of independent people’s organizations to enable the people to pursue and protect, within the democratic framework, their legitimate and collective interests and aspirations through peaceful and lawful means.”

Meanwhile, Section 16 of Article XIII protects the right to “effective and reasonable participation at all levels of social, political, and economic decision-making.” It provides for “the establishment of adequate consultation mechanisms” by law. Such participation is also mandated under Section 14 of Article X (Local Governments), which requires membership of representatives from non-governmental organizations in development councils.

Protection of Civic Freedoms

The Civil Code of the Philippines provides remedies against infringements of basic human rights. Article 32 allows the filing of a damages suit against those who directly or indirectly obstruct, defeat, violate, impede, or impair rights and liberties of another person. Article 19 of the Civil Code may also be used against those who exercise their rights to harm or abuse others.

Meanwhile, the special writs of amparo and habeas data have also been invoked for the protection of the life, liberty and security of human rights defenders and civil society leaders. The Supreme Court’s rules on procedures for environmental abuses include provisions against strategic lawsuits against public participation.

Public Participation

Collaboration between NGOs and certain government entities is provided for in laws such as the Local Government Code, the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act, the Magna Carta of Women, and the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons.

Formation and Registration

The creation and registration of non-stock, non-profit organizations are governed by the Revised Corporation Code. Some taxation benefits can be found in the National Internal Revenue Code. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR) have released memoranda and circulars affecting registered civil society organizations.

Restrictions on Civic Freedoms

Some provisions of the Revised Penal Code have been used to restrict and stifle the exercise of civic freedoms. The Human Security Act (HSA) of 2007 and other anti-terrorism, anti-insurgency issuances of the Executive have been used to target CSOs critical of the government. The Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020, which repeals the HSA, was enacted into law and took effect in July 2020. (See below “Anti-Terrorism Act”.)

Since the declaration of a state of public emergency, several COVID-19 related laws and issuances, such as the Bayanihan to Heal As One Act and the Mandatory Reporting of Notifiable Disease and Health Events of Public Health Concern Act, have been invoked by law enforcement to stifle online and offline dissent. However, the Bayanihan Act was in effect only until June 2020 because the Philippine Congress did not act to extend it.

Anti-Terrorism Act

On July 3, 2020, Republic Act No. 11479 or the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020 (ATA) was signed into law amid widespread protests. The ATA introduces provisions which were not in the Human Security Act (HSA) of 2007, such as Inciting to Commit Terrorist Acts and Recruitment to and Membership in A Terrorist Organization. It also expands the definition of terrorism and broadens the power of state authorities regarding the Surveillance of Suspects and Interception and Recording of Communications and the Detention Without Judicial Warrant of Arrest on mere suspicion that a person engages in acts of terrorism.

Under the new anti-terrorism law, the Anti-Terrorism Council has the power on its own to designate persons and organizations as terrorists. The bill also allows the Anti-Money Laundering Council to freeze a designated organization’s assets pursuant to the Terrorism Financing Law.

The ATA also excludes HSA’s Section 50 on Damages for Unproven Charge of Terrorism. Section 50 required the police agency or the Anti-Terrorism Council to pay any person acquitted of terrorism “damages in the amount of PHP 500,000 for every day that he or she was detained or deprived of liberty or arrested without a warrant as a result of the accusation.”

In October 2020, the Philippine’s executive department approved the ATA’s implementing rules and regulations. The IRR reiterated provisions of the ATA which have been criticized for vagueness and overbreadth. It introduced provisions such as the process of delisting after publication of the names of individuals and organizations designated as terrorists and the inclusion of “creative, artistic, and cultural expressions” among acts not considered as terrorism, depending on their purpose or intention.

At least 37 groups of petitioners sought the repeal in part or in toto of the ATA before the Supreme Court of the Philippines. In December 2021, the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional two portions of the Anti-Terrorism Act and their corresponding provisions in the IRR:

(1) the phrase in Section 4 which penalizes advocacy, protest, dissent and other similar exercise of civil and political rights as terrorism based on perceived intention or purpose “to cause death or serious physical harm to a person, to endanger a person’s life, or to create a serious risk to public safety;” and,

(2) the power of the Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) under Section 25 to approve requests by other states or supranational entities to designate individuals or organizations as terrorist who meet the criteria under UNSCR No. 1373.

However, the Supreme Court upheld other controversial provisions of the ATA as constitutional, including the powers of the ATC to authorize detention without judicial warrant of arrest and to designate individuals and groups as terrorists on its own finding of probable cause that they have committed, are attempting to commit, or have conspired to commit acts penalized by the law. It should be noted that designated persons may be put under surveillance upon written order of the Court of Appeals. The Anti-Money Laundering Council may also examine and freeze their properties and funds allegedly used for terrorism financing.

Reconsideration of the Supreme Court’s decision was sought. However, the Supreme Court denied with finality the motions for reconsideration on April 26, 2022.

Both Houses of the 20^th Congress are currently discussing the below proposed laws that were filed in June or July 2025 and may affect the exercise of civic freedoms in the Philippines.

Foreign Interference Bill

The Philippines has proposed to regulate foreign interference and influence through bills purporting to protect the country’s sovereignty. However, these bills contain provisions which could be weaponized against independent CSOs that receive foreign financial support to conduct their activities. 

In July 2025, House Bill No. 1068 was proposed in the House of Representatives. It defines malign foreign influence activity broadly, potentially impacting even legitimate exercise of rights. Section 22 gives the National Bureau of Investigation authority to order the taking down of any communications believed to be constituting “malign foreign activity” without the need for a court order and prior any investigation or prosecution. Any such activity is penalized by imprisonment and a fine between one million and five million Philippine pesos (USD 17,500 to USD 87,500 as of August 2025). 

In addition, Senate Bill No. 664, which was introduced in July 2025, proposes to create a Counter Foreign Interference Council, which may order internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict access to online publications upon its own determination that these publications are engaged in foreign interference through electronic communications activity. The ISPs will be fined for failing to implement any access blocking order. 

Freedom and Protection of Journalist Act

A proposed Freedom and Protection of Journalist Act (House Bill No. 1188) introduces protections against strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPP) for journalists, whistleblowers, academics, and citizens engaged in public criticism of public officials or matters of public interest. The anti-SLAPP provision states that “no civil action for libel or defamation shall be allowed to proceed as a form of harassment or suppression.”

“Red-tagging” Bill

House Bill No. 213 introduced by two party-list representatives defines “red-tagging” as “the act of publicly labeling, vilifying, branding, naming, accusing or caricaturing individuals, groups, or organizations of being state enemies, subversives, armed rebels, communists or terrorists, or fronts thereof, thereby implying or insinuating involvement or engagement in armed rebellion, acts of terrorism or any wrongdoing or criminal acts.” Under the proposed law, red-tagging committed by public officials, employees, and their agents will be punishable.

Proposal to compensate victims of rights abuses

A proposal to compensate victims of human rights violations is also pending before the House’s Committee on Human Rights. House Bill No. 580 allows victims of human rights violations to be able to claim monetary compensation before a compensation board that would be created under the Commission on Human Rights. It states that human rights violations “occur when actions by state (or non-state) actors abuse, ignore, or deny basic human rights (including civil, political, cultural, social, and economic rights in line with human rights and humanitarian law).”

Extrajudicial killings

Two bills (House Bill Nos. 1629 and 1461) filed in the House of Representatives seek to penalize extrajudicial killings (EJK) committed by public officers as a “heinous crime”.

Right to access information

Several bills have been filed regarding the public’s right to access information. Each bill contains a provision on exceptions to access to information. For example, HB No. 530 provides an exception not just for government agencies, but also “private individuals or entities dealing, contracting, or transacting, of whatever nature, with a government agency when a transaction utilizes public funds.”

Decriminalization of libel

Among other bills, the decriminalization of libel has been proposed to the 20^th Congress through House Bill No. 441 and Senate Bill No. 250. If passed, the articles relating to libel under the 1935 Revised Penal Code will be repealed. Senate Bill No. 250 mentions that the repeal of criminal libel does not preclude any offended party from filing an action for damages under the Civil Code of the Philippines.

Disinformation

Bills seeking to penalize the spread of disinformation are pending before both houses of Congress. For example, Senate Bill No. 191 punishes the creation and publication of false or misleading information, either by using one’s account or by using a fictitious online account. It also penalizes the financing of such activity. On the other hand, House Bill No. 251 proposes an amendment to the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 by including “the creation and dissemination of fake news through a computer system or any other similar means which may be devised in the future” among content-related offenses.

Public participation

Several bills seek to promote people’s involvement in public policymaking and resource management. For example, House Bill No. 11 would require the establishment of participatory mechanisms that will allow open, inclusive, and meaningful citizen engagement in the budget process, including partnerships with CSOs. A similar bill filed in the Senate (Senate Bill No. 32) would institutionalize the participation of CSOs in the preparation of the annual national budget. Under the latter bill, national government agencies and government-owned and government-controlled corporations would adopt accreditation guidelines for CSOs to participate in the preparation of their annual budget.

Representation of elderly persons

Lastly, a proposed bill seeks the creation of Sangguniang Nakakatanda to improve representation of elderly persons in the government (House Bill No. 189). Greater participation of women in the government is also being sought through the allocation of seats for qualified women in different public offices under House Bill No. 327.

The Philippine Constitution encourages the formation of non-governmental, community-based, and sectoral organizations that promote the welfare of the nation. Additionally, Article XIII, Section 15 of the Constitution confirms that the state will “respect the role of independent people’s organizations to enable the people to pursue and protect, within the democratic framework, their legitimate and collective interests and aspirations through peaceful and lawful means.” People’s organizations are defined as “bona fide associations of citizens with demonstrated capacity to promote the public interest and with identifiable leadership, membership, and structure.”

Civil society organizations (CSOs) in the Philippines typically register as non-stock corporations with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Under the Revised Corporation Code (RCC), a non-stock corporation is defined as “one where no part of its income is distributable as dividends to its members, trustees, or officers.” These entities may be established for various purposes, including charitable, religious, educational, professional, cultural, fraternal, literary, scientific, social, civic, or similar aims, as well as sectoral and industry-based interests. A non-stock corporation may pursue multiple purposes, provided that the secondary objectives do not contradict its non-stock character.

As of January 15, 2024, the SEC recorded a total of 183,014 active registered non-stock corporations across the country.

Beyond SEC registration, CSOs are required to obtain tax identification numbers from the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR). They may also be required to secure business operation permits from the local government units (LGUs) where their main offices are located. For tax benefits and donation eligibility, organizations may also seek accreditation from the Philippine Council for NGO Certification (PCNC).

Republic Act No. 10693 governs the registration of microfinance non-governmental organizations (NGOs), establishing  the Microfinance NGO Regulatory Council to oversee their accreditation.

Organizations intending to participate in the party-list electoral system must register with the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) rather than the SEC. A COMELEC-issued certificate of registration confers legal personality for these groups.

Duly registered non-stock corporations may qualify for income tax exemptions under Section 30 of the amended Republic Act (RA) No. 10963, RA 11256, RA 11346, RA 11467 and RA 11534 . These exemptions apply to income earned in furtherance of the purposes for which an organization was established under Section 30 of the NIRC. Income derived from real property or any for-profit activities remains taxable. Organizations must obtain a certificate of tax exemption from the appropriate Revenue Regional Offices of the Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR).

BIR applies two key tests when determining eligibility for an income tax exemption:

• Organizational Test – evaluates whether the corporation’s foundational documents, such as SEC registration, articles of incorporation, and by-Laws, clearly demonstrate that it is organized exclusively for one or more of the purposes listed in Section 30 of the NIRC.
• Operational Test – assesses whether the organization’s regular activities are devoted exclusively to fulfilling its stated purposes. A corporation fails this test if it does not conduct activities aligned with its stated purpose, or if a substantial part of its operations constitutes “activities conducted for profit”.

Entities eligible for income tax exemption under Section 30 include non-stock corporations and associations organized and operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, athletic, or cultural purposes, or for the rehabilitation of veterans, provided that no part of their net income or assets inures to the benefit of any member, organizer, officer or specific individual. Definitions of qualifying corporate purposes are further detailed in Revenue Memorandum Order No. 38-2019.

Civic leagues and organizations not organized for profit but operated exclusively to promote social welfare may also qualify for tax-exempt status.

For donations to be tax-deductible, the donee (recipient) organization must be accredited by the BIR.

Under the Magna Carta for Disabled Persons, non-governmental institutions establishing homes, residential communities, or retirement villages specifically designed for persons with disabilities may avail of a five-year real property tax exemption.

Article XIII, Section 16 of the Constitution guarantees the people’s right to effective and reasonable participation in decision-making processes at all levels of society. It states: “The right of the people and their organizations to effective and reasonable participation at all levels of social, political, and economic decision-making shall not be abridged. The State shall, by law, facilitate the establishment of adequate consultation mechanisms.”

This constitutional mandate has been operationalized through several national laws, including the Local Government Code of 1991 and the Indigenous Peoples’ Rights Act (IPRA). In addition, most government agencies have adopted their own Citizen’s Charters, which provide mechanisms for public feedback and complaints.

These laws and mechanisms require consultations with CSOs and affected communities in government development projects. For example, the Local Government Code prohibits the implementation of any project without prior consultation with relevant civil society stakeholders. IPRA mandates the free and prior informed consent of Indigenous Cultural Communities and Indigenous Peoples before any exploration or development of ancestral lands and domains can take place. Nonetheless, individual indigenous activists have seen their rights violated.

For example, Feliz Salavaria Jr., who was an activist for several CSOs advocating for indigenous rights and was a staff member of the Ethnic Studies and Development Center’s Minority Rights Advocacy Program, was abducted in August 2024 only days after another activist, James Jazmines, was also abducted in a “professional operation” in Albay province. Although in July 2025 the The Court of Appeals (CA) granted the privileges of the writs of amparo and habeas data to the daughters of of Salaveria Jr., he had still not be not been found as of August 2025. Two months earlier, on May 6, 2025, the Supreme Court also issued a temporary protection order to the family of Jazmines and issued the writs of amparo and habeas data and directed the Court of Appeals to conduct a summary hearing on the family’s petition on July 7, 2025.

Laws also promote formal collaboration between government agencies and civil society. Some agencies and institutions are required to include civil society representatives. For example, local development councils must have at least two CSO representatives. In June 2022, the Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) issued Memorandum Circular No. 2022-083, which provides guidelines for accrediting CSOs seeking representation in local special bodies (LSBs), such as local development councils, health boards, school boards, and peace and order councils.

Other sectoral laws strengthen participatory mechanisms. The Magna Carta of Women mandates government collaboration with media-related CSOs in the development of policies and programs for non-discriminatory and non-derogatory portrayals of women in the media. The Social Reform and Poverty Alleviation Act requires engagement with CSOs serving marginalized sectors, with one CSO representative serving as a member of the National Anti-Poverty Commission.

In addition, the Constitution reserves 20 percent of the seats at the House of Representatives (the lower House of the Philippine Congress) for party-list representatives from national, regional, and sectoral organizations. Sectors represented include labor, peasant, urban poor, indigenous cultural communities, women, and youth.

However, the implementation of these participation mechanisms has faced criticism for manipulation and misuse. For example, indigenous groups near the Kaliwa Dam project accused the Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerages System and the National Commission on Indigenous Peoples of offering monetary compensation in exchange for consent.

In January 2021, DILG issued a memorandum institutionalizing People’s Councils at the local government level. The order requires organizations seeking accreditation with the People’s Councils to secure clearances from the Armed Forces of the Philippines and the Philippine National Police, asserting this was necessary “for security reasons” and to verify the legitimacy of applicants. The memorandum further required existing clearances to indicate that the CSO was “cleared from any subversive and illegal activities.” Human rights groups and CSOs criticized the requirement, arguing that it contributes to the shrinking civic space in the Philippines. In May 2021, DILG issued an amendment  repealing the memorandum.

Meanwhile, in June 2021, the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC) called for the Commission on Elections (COMELEC) to cancel the registration of some party-list groups, alleging that these organizations are “communist fronts.”

Registration of CSOs is not mandatory in the Philippines. However, unregistered CSOs do not enjoy the tax benefits awarded to registered organizations and may not be qualified to receive funding from government agencies. Also, some private sector entities prefer to donate to registered organizations in order to avail of tax deductions for charitable contributions.

The Revised Corporation Code (RCC) provides that any person, partnership, association, or corporation may be an incorporator, defined as “those stockholders or members mentioned in the articles of incorporation as originally forming and composing the corporation and who are signatories thereof.”

There must be between two and fifteen incorporators, all of whom must be members of the non-stock corporation. Natural persons must be of legal age. The partnership, association, or domestic corporation must be SEC-registered.

To be registered as a non-stock corporation, the applicant must submit its articles of incorporation and by-laws to the SEC, which then issues a Certificate of Incorporation. The prescribed content and form of the articles are listed in Section 13 and 14 of the RCC.

Activities

The activities of registered non-stock, non-profit organizations must align with the purposes stated in their articles of incorporation and by-laws.

Certain activities require permits, licenses, or accreditation from relevant government agencies, depending on the nature of the work. These agencies include the Department of Agriculture, Department of Education, Department of Social Work and Development (DSWD), National Commission on Indigenous Peoples, and National Commission on Muslim Filipinos. For example, an individual or organization wishing to solicit or receive donations for charitable or public welfare purposes must first obtain a permit from the DSWD as per Presidential Decree No. 1564.

Reporting Requirements

All registered corporations are required to submit their General Information Sheets and Annual Financial Statements to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

In 2018, the SEC imposed additional reporting obligations on non-stock, non-profit organizations, citing the need to safeguard them from misuse for money laundering and terrorist financing. These requirements, later refined in 2019, mandate the disclosure of sensitive information. Many CSOs criticized these measures as overly burdensome, invasive, and potentially dangerous, especially for groups working with vulnerable populations. Critics have also argued that the circular may be used to deter funding to organizations critical of the government or those accused—without evidence—of links to the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP).

Counter-terrorism Framework

In December 2018, President Rodrigo Duterte institutionalized the “whole-of-nation” approach to peace and development through Executive Order No. 70, which created the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict (NTF-ELCAC). The approach claims to address the root causes of insurgency by harmonizing the delivery of basic services and promoting inclusive governance.

In practice, however, NTF-ELCAC has been widely criticized for targeting and vilifying CSOs, human rights defenders, and development workers it accuses of having ties to the CPP, the New People’s Army (NPA), or the National Democratic Front. This practice, commonly referred to as “red-tagging,” has resulted in surveillance, harassment, and threats against civil society actors.

Despite this criticism, the NTF-ELCAC and whole-of-nation approach have remained active under the administration of President Ferdinand Marcos Jr,, who took office on June 30, 2022.

Legal Protections Invoked by CSOs

CSOs have attempted to use the writ of amparo and the writ of habeas data—legal remedies intended to protect individuals whose right to life, liberty, or security is threatened by unlawful actions. However, these petitions have generally had limited success.

A significant development occurred in July 2023, when the Supreme Court of the Philippines overturned a prior dismissal of a writ of amparo petition filed by former lawmaker Siegfried Deduro, who had been subjected to red-tagging and surveillance. The Court recognized that “red-tagging, vilification, labelling, and guilt by association” constitute threats to an individual’s right to life, liberty, or security. It also acknowledged red-tagging as a pervasive practice in the Philippines where groups aligned with leftist ideologies are indiscriminately labeled as affiliates of anti-democratic or insurgent movements.

Two years later, in July 2025, the Movement Against Disinformation also announced that it had obtained information about the individuals behind the systematic red-tagging of a Mindanao-based journalist. The Movement was representing Leonardo Vicente “Cong” Corrales, the editor-in-chief of a local newspaper in Mindanao, in a May 2023 complaint before the National Privacy Commission. The Movement had been seeking the disclosure of information about anonymous accounts vilifying the journalist on Facebook.

Foreign Funding

Non-stock, non-profit organizations, along with other corporations and financial institutions, are subject to the provisions of the Anti-Money Laundering Act and the Terrorism Financing Prevention and Suppression Act of 2012. However, these legal frameworks have reportedly been weaponized under the government’s intensified counter-terrorism efforts, which have targeted CSOs accused of being communist fronts.

One notable case is that of the Rural Missionaries of the Philippines (RMP), whose bank accounts were frozen due to allegations of terrorist financing. In August 2022, 16 individuals including members of RMP, were indicted for alleged violations of the Terrorism Financing law.

Government counter-terrorism bodies have also engaged with foreign governments and donors, including the European Union, to restrict or impede foreign funding for CSOs allegedly linked to communist groups.

In a separate but related action, the government blocked loans and grants received by the government and civil society from countries that supported a United Nations Human Rights Council resolution adopted on July 11, 2019, which directed the UN High Commissioner on Human Rights to produce a comprehensive report on the human rights situation in the Philippines. This suspension was later lifted in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

On February 5, 2021, the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) issued Note No. 2021-0592, informing diplomatic missions that all foreign funding intended for Philippine NGOs—regardless of how it is disbursed or transferred—must be cleared through the DFA.

Foreign Affairs Secretary Teodoro Locsin Jr. stated via Twitter that “legit NGOs” would not be affected by the measure. He justified the policy as a way for the government to responsibly monitor foreign financial flows amid insurgency and terrorism threats, emphasizing that the requirement would reassure well-intentioned donors that their funds are not misused.

On July 4, 2023, the Philippines adopted its National Anti-Money Laundering, Counter-Terrorism Financing and Counter-Proliferation Financing Strategy for 2023-2027. Under Strategic Objective 3 on terrorism financing, one of the priority areas involves the “[continuous assessment of] terrorism financing risks associated with non-profit organizations.” The responsibility for implementing this objective rests with the Terrorism Financing Sub-Committee, which is chaired by the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency.

Philippine law prohibits foreign corporations from giving donations to political parties or candidates or for partisan political purposes. CSOs participating in the party-list elections are also prohibited from accepting foreign funding. Violations can result in revocation of registration as a party-list group, pursuant to Section 6(4) of Republic Act No. 7941.

Domestic Funding

Non-stock, non-profit corporations and CSOs are permitted to engage in profit-generating activities, provided these are incidental to their operations. Under the Revised Corporation Code (RCC), “any profit which a non-stock corporation may obtain incidental to its operations shall, whenever necessary or proper, be used for the furtherance of the purpose or purposes for which the corporation was organized, subject to the provisions of this Title.”

Accredited CSOs may receive funding from both national and local government sources. To be eligible for public funding, organizations must be registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Bureau of Internal Revenue (BIR), and the specific agencies or departments. In some cases, certification from the Philippine Council for NGO Certification (PCNC) is also required. NGOs that receive public funds may be subject to post-audit by the Commission on Audit.

Under Section 35 of the Local Government Code, local government units (LGUs) are allowed to enter into joint ventures with organizations for the delivery of basic services, capacity-building, and livelihood projects. LGUs may also provide financial assistance for “economic, socially-oriented, environmental, or cultural projects” implemented within their jurisdiction.

The freedoms of expression and speech are guaranteed under the 1987 Philippine Constitution’s Bill of Rights. Article III, Section 4 states: “No law shall be passed abridging the freedom of speech, of expression, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

Legal Protections and Limitations

The Civil Code provides legal remedies for violations of these rights. Under Article 32, any individual may be held liable for damages if he or she “directly or indirectly obstructs, defeats, violates or in any manner impedes or impairs” another’s freedom of speech.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized the vital role of free expression in a democratic society. However, the exercise of this right is not absolute. One key standard for restricting this right is the “clear and present danger” test, which permits limitations only when expression poses an imminent threat to public order or safety.

The Revised Penal Code (RPC) of 1930 criminalizes defamation, including libel and slander. The Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 penalizes online libel, applying the same elements as the RPC but with harsher penalties.

Provisions on incitement to rebellion, insurrection, or sedition have been used to prosecute critics and activists, particularly those labeled by the government as “leftists,” “communists,” “legal fronts,” or “subversives.” Some officials have proposed reinstating the Anti-Subversion Law, which was repealed in 1992.

The RPC also criminalizes the publication of false news that may endanger public order or damage the reputation or interests of the state. It similarly penalizes individuals who use words or speech to incite “disobedience to the law or to the constituted authorities or praise, justify or extol any act punished by law.”

During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bayanihan to Heal as One Act temporarily expanded restrictions on speech. Section 6(f) penalized individuals or groups who spread false information related to the crisis—particularly content deemed to “promote chaos, panic, anarchy, fear or confusion”— on social media and other platforms. Several people were arrested, detained, and/or charged under this provision during the pandemic. However, the Act expired in June 2020 after Congress declined to extend it.

More recently, the Subscriber Identity Module (SIM) Registration Act (RA No. 11934), enacted on October 10, 2022, aims to combat fraud, identity theft, and spoofing—the transmission of misleading information about the source of a call or message for malicious purposes. The law mandates the registration of all SIM cards with public telecommunications entities (PTEs), which must maintain a SIM Register.

The Act also includes provisions on data privacy, requiring absolute confidentiality of registered information. However, full names and addresses of SIM card owners may be disclosed upon certain conditions—such as when a court issues a subpoena, or when disclosure is required by law.

Access to Information

The meaningful exercise of free speech depends on the ability to access information. This right is guaranteed under Article III, Section 7 of the Constitution. Additionally, Article II, Section 28 commits the state to adopt and implement “a policy of full disclosure of all its transactions involving public interest.” Both provisions allow for limitations as may be provided by law. However, the Philippine Congress has yet to enact a comprehensive freedom of information (FOI) law.

In 2016, President Rodrigo Duterte issued Executive Order No. 2, s. 2016, which mandates all government offices under the executive branch to develop and publish People’s FOI manuals. The Executive Order was accompanied by an Inventory of Exceptions, which groups information exempt from disclosure into nine categories:

• Information covered by executive privilege;
• Privileged information related to national security, defense, or international relations;
• Information involving law enforcement and public/personal safety;
• Confidential information for the protection of individual privacy;
• Information known through official capacity and deemed confidential;
• Information whose premature disclosure would be prejudicial;
• Records of confidential proceedings;
• Information considered confidential under banking and finance laws; and
• Other exceptions provided under law, jurisprudence rules, and regulations.

This broad list of exceptions may restrict rather than enable access to information on public matters. Moreover, individual agencies may impose their own additional limitations in their FOI Manuals.

Restrictions Related to National Security

The government’s counter-insurgency program has led to further limitations on access to information, especially on matters related to peace processes and publications allegedly linked to communist or “subversive” ideologies.

In September 2020, at least three state universities removed publications labeled “subversive” from their libraries, citing efforts to protect students and youth from radical and communist ideas. In some cases, removals were prompted by inspections or consultations with the military, police, or local anti-terrorism task forces. One university explicitly cited support for the government’s “whole-of-nation” approach to counter-insurgency.

In October 2020, a regional office of the Commission on Higher Education reportedly released a memorandum encouraging the removal of such materials from both libraries and digital platforms as these could be “used to radicalize the mind.” The educational institutions were asked to turn over the materials to the National Intelligence Coordinating Agency.

Cyberattacks

Between May and June 2021, several alternative media groups experienced cyberattacks on their websites. Initial findings of the Computer Emergency Response Team of the Department of Information and Communications Technology traced the attacks to an IP address assigned to the Philippine Army.

Similar cyberattacks targeted news organizations starting in December 2021. A hacker group claimed responsibility for these attacks, stating it was retaliation for their biased reporting and perceived anti-government stance. The same group also targeted the websites of opposition politicians and party-list groups critical of the administration. Notably, individuals affiliated with the government’s anti-insurgency task force reportedly lauded the group for taking down the website of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP).

Internet Censorship and Website Blocking

In June 2022, the National Telecommunications Commission (NTC) ordered Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to block access to the websites of organizations allegedly affiliated with or supportive of terrorist groups. Affected sites included those of independent media outlets,  religious organizations, and CSOs vilified as “legal fronts” of the CPP.

The NTC directive was based on a request from then National Security Advisor Gen. Hermogenes Esperon Jr., who cited Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) resolutions designating the CPP, New People’s Army (NPA), and National Democratic Front as terrorist entities. However, none of the media or CSOs named in the blocking order had been designated as terrorists.

One of the affected outlets, Bulatlat (run by the Alipato Media Center, Inc.), filed a petition in July 2022 to nullify the order. One month later, on August 11, 2022, a Quezon City regional trial court granted Bulatlat’s request for a preliminary injunction, temporarily halting enforcement of the NTC’s order while the case is pending. The case was submitted for decision in May 2025 and, according to an editor of Bulatlat, the final decision is expected by the end of 2025. Besides the Bulatlat website, however, multiple other websites listed in the NTC order have remained inaccessible and blocked.

Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation (SLAPPs)

Strategic lawsuits against public participation (SLAPPs) are legal actions intended to harass, intimidate, or silence individuals or groups exercising their rights to free speech, public participation, or advocacy. These lawsuits are often filed by powerful actors as a form of retaliation, burdening defendants with legal costs and discouraging dissent.

In the Philippines, SLAPPs are specifically addressed under Administrative Matter No. 09-6-8-SC, or the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases. These rules allow individuals to invoke SLAPPs as a defense if they are being sued for actions undertaken in connection with the enforcement of environmental laws, protection of the environment, or the assertion of environmental rights. If the court determines that the case is indeed a SLAPP, it can be dismissed outright.

In 2018, the Supreme Court was petitioned to incorporate a SLAPP provision into A.M. No. 04-10-11-SC (Rule on Violence Against Women and Children). However, the Court dismissed the petition, stating that the request was not the appropriate avenue for invoking its rule-making power. The Court further clarified that the SLAPP concept does not apply to cases of domestic violence under Republic Act No. 9262, which is not among the laws covered by the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases.

Weaponization of Other Laws to Silence Unpopular Beliefs

No law explicitly prohibits individuals or CSOs from criticizing the government or advocating for unpopular political views. In fact, the 1987 Constitution expressly forbids the detention of any person “solely by reason of his political beliefs and aspirations.”

However, in practice, government officials and other actors have exploited existing laws and permissible legal restrictions to suppress dissent and silence criticism.

National security laws, in particular, have been used to target human rights defenders and activists. In February 2018, more than 600 persons—including then-UN Special Rapporteur for Indigenous Peoples Concerns Vicky Tauli-Corpuz—were listed as alleged members of the CPP in a petition seeking to proscribe the group as a terrorist organization. In January 2019, the Department of Justice amended the petition, removing the names from the original list.

Criminal charges such as kidnapping, arson, and murder have also been filed against human rights defenders. Reports also indicate that their homes and offices have been subjected to surveillance, unlawful searches, and seizures.

A notable crackdown occurred in March 2021, when nine activists were killed during raids conducted jointly by the Philippine National Police and the military in Southern Luzon. Authorities alleged that the activists resisted the execution of search warrants for illegal possession of firearms and explosives. Six others were arrested and now face criminal charges. In a media interview, the regional police chief disclosed that these operations were conducted pursuant to Executive Order No. 70, which institutionalizes the government’s “whole-of-nation” approach to counter-insurgency. The police also publicly tagged the slain and arrested activists as members of the NPA.

The use of legal processes to target dissent has extended to independent journalism. Journalist Maria Ressa and her media outlet Rappler, known for their critical stance on the government, were charged with multiple counts of tax evasion. The charges stemmed from alleged failures to declare tax liabilities related to the issuance of depositary receipts issued to investors. All five cases were dismissed in 2023.

Despite such acquittals, crackdowns on political opponents and critics continued into 2024, increasingly marked by reports of abductions and enforced disappearances:

• In August 2024, two activists were abducted in separate incidents in Albay province and on August 23, unidentified men abducted James Jazmines, a labor organizer with Kilusang Mayo Uno. Five days later, Jazmines’ colleague, Felix Salaveria Jr., an advocate for eco-waste management and indigenous rights, was similarly abducted.
• Also in August, environmental defender Rowena Dasig went missing in Quezon province after her release from prison. Authorities claimed she was released to a family member, but her family and legal counsel have not heard from her since. Dasig had been cleared of charges related to illegal possession of firearms, ammunition, and explosives due to insufficient evidence.
• In September 2024, two peasant organizers, Andy Magno and Vladimir Maro, were reported missing in Isabela province. Maro was later found in the custody of the Philippine National Police and now faces charges of attempted murder and violation of the Anti-Terrorism Act of 2020. Magno remains missing.
• In the same month, youth activist Fhobie Matias, who was working with a peasant organization, was abducted—allegedly by military personnel—in Laguna province. She is reportedly being held in an unidentified military camp.

Although the Philippines has enacted a domestic law criminalizing enforced disappearances, it has yet to ratify the International Convention for the Protection of All Persons from Enforced Disappearances, raising concerns about accountability and commitment to international human rights standards.

The right to freedom of assembly is constitutionally guaranteed in the same provision that protects the freedoms of speech, expression, and the press. Article III, Section 4 of the Constitution reads: “No law shall be passed abridging… the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the government for redress of grievances.”

The Public Assembly Act of 1985 (BP No. 880) outlines guidelines to “ensure the free exercise of such right without prejudice to the rights of others to life, liberty and equal protection of the law.” The law explicitly prohibits any obstruction, impediment, disruption, or denial of the right to peaceful assembly, regulating only the time and place of public assemblies.

Labor-related assemblies, such as pickets and strikes arising from labor disputes, are governed by the Labor Code of the Philippines.

Applicable Procedures and Requirements

A written permit from the local government unit is required for a public assembly held in a public space, which includes highways, streets, bridges, parks, plazas, and any open space of public ownership accessible to the public.

To obtain a permit, an application must be submitted to the mayor’s office at least five working days before the scheduled event. It must include:

• names of the organizers or leaders;
• purpose of the assembly;
• date, time, and duration of the event; and
• estimated number of participants, transport, and public address systems to be used.

Organizers must also acknowledge the responsibilities under Section 8 of the law, including ensuring that demonstrators do not harass others or interfere with the rights of non-participants.

According to Section 13 of the Public Assembly Act, failure to obtain a permit in advance, or holding an assembly in a place not covered by the permit, may result in imprisonment of the organizers for between one month and one day to six months.

The mayor is duty-bound to grant the permit, unless there is “clear and convincing evidence” that the assembly poses “a clear and present danger” to public order, safety, convenience, morals, or health. Applicants must be granted due process if the permit is denied on these grounds.

The permit is considered automatically granted if the mayor or his representative fails to act on the application within two working days. Any decision must be communicated to the applicant within 24 hours. BP No. 880 imposes penalties on local government officials who arbitrarily deny or modify permits or refuse to accept or acknowledge receipt of applications.

Section 15 of BP No. 880 mandates that each city and municipality designate at least one suitable freedom park where demonstrations may be held at any time without the need of a prior permit. In 2006, the Department of the Interior and Local Government issued guidelines for the establishment of such parks. While no prior permit is required for assemblies held in designated freedom parks, organizers must still send written notice to the mayor.

For assemblies held on private property, the consent of the owner is required. Assemblies held on the grounds of government-owned and operated educational institutions are subject to the internal rules and regulations of those institutions.

Legal Barriers to Freedom of Assembly

While the Public Assembly Act does not allow the government to regulate the content of expressions during assemblies, authorities have used other laws to penalize participants after the fact. These include Article 146 of the Revised Penal Code, which criminalizes:

• Meetings attended by armed persons intending to commit crimes;
• Assemblies inciting treason, rebellion, insurrection, sedition, or assaults against public authorities.

The Labor Code also restricts certain groups—particularly civil servants—from participating in pickets or strikes that disrupt public services.

Restrictions during the COVID-19 Pandemic

Freedom of assembly was severely restricted during the COVID-19 pandemic. Laws and regulations such as BP No. 880, the Bayanihan Act, Article 151 of the Revised Penal Code, and the Mandatory Reporting of Notifiable Diseases Act were used to suppress protests—particularly those critical of the government’s pandemic response.

For example, activists carrying placards calling for improved public health measures were arrested and charged. Authorities cited Section 9(e) of the Mandatory Reporting Act, which penalizes the “non-cooperation” of persons or entities during a public health emergency, particularly for alleged violations of social distancing and bans on mass gatherings.

Policing/Enforcement

The Public Assembly Act prohibits law enforcement from interfering in lawful assemblies and provides strict guidelines for police conduct, such as being in uniform and the non-use of firearms.

In addition, law enforcement must remain at least 100 meters away from assemblies and observe “maximum tolerance,” defined as “the highest degree of restraint that the military, police and other peacekeeping authorities shall observe during a public assembly or in the dispersal of the same.”

Sections 11 and 12 of the Act establish the procedures for dispersing assemblies—with and without permits.

Despite these protections, police have repeatedly used unnecessary force and inhumane methods to disperse peaceful protests. In 2005, the Philippine National Police violently dispersed rallies against then President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo. The police justified the use of force as being in compliance with the Calibrated Preemptive Response policy set by the executive (Malacañang). The legality of the policy was later challenged, and in April 2006, the Supreme Court declared it unconstitutional in Bayan v. Ermita. This decision remained in effect as the prevailing law thereafter.

Under the Public Assembly Act, any person carrying a deadly weapon or burning objects within 100 meters of a public assembly may be subject to criminal penalties. The Act also penalizes law enforcement officers who unnecessarily use firearms in dispersing any public assembly.

On May 11, 2022, amid protests over alleged election fraud, the mayor of Manila issued a memorandum directing police and barangay (village) officials to “strictly enforce the provisions” of BP No. 880 and ordered the Bureau of Permits to act promptly on applications for permits for public assemblies.

Group obtains names behind red-tagging of journalist who sued Meta (July 2025)
An anti-disinformation group has secured a list of some of those allegedly behind the systematic red-tagging attacks against a Cagayan de Oro-based journalist, including the spouse of a famous social media influencer and a government institution. Following an arbitration facilitated by the National Privacy Commission (NPC), the Movement Against Disinformation (MAD) obtained internet service provider data and the identities of at least 10 of around 30 social media page administrators allegedly involved in red-tagging Leonardo Vicente “Cong” Corrales, editor-in-chief of the Mindanao Gold Star Daily.

Manila police wields Martial Law-era law against 10 Makabayan senatorial bets (January 2025)
The Manila Police District filed illegal assembly charges before the Manila Prosecutors Office against the 10 senatorial candidates of the Makabayan bloc, and other progressive leaders. On January 9, the group received information that 13 activists have been charged by the MPD for allegedly violating the Public Assembly Act or Batas Pambansa 880, a relic of the Marcos Sr. dictatorship.

Army lauds arrest of 3 in Negros facing ‘terrorism financing’ raps (January 2025)
The Army’s 3rd Infantry (Spearhead) Division commander commended a special task for the filing of terrorism financing cases and the arrest of three persons in Negros Occidental allegedly linked to the “communist terrorist group (CTG)”. The successful arrests of three individuals, based on warrants issued by RTC Branch 31 in Iloilo City, for violations of the Anti-Terrorism Financing Law, represent a crucial step in curbing the flow of funds and resources to the CTG, Maj. Gen. Marion Sison said in a statement on Saturday, Jan. 4. Arrested on Friday were Dharyl Albañez, Federico Salvilla, and Perla Pavillar, development workers of the Paghidaet sa Kauswagan Development Group (PDG) Inc. in Negros.

Atom Araullo wins P2M damages in red-tagging case (December 2024)
Broadcast journalist Atom Araullo has won a P2-million damages suit against Sonshine Media Network International (SMNI) hosts Lorraine Badoy and Jeffrey Celiz for red-tagging him and his family. In a 27-page decision, the Quezon City Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 306 ruled that Badoy and Celiz’s statements, linking Araullo and his mother, physician Carol Araullo, to communist groups, were defamatory and beyond the bounds of free speech.

Supreme Court grants temporary protection to environmental activist, family (October 2024)
The Supreme Court has issued a protective writ to an environmental activist who went missing in Pangasinan earlier this year. In a resolution promulgated on September 9, the high court granted the petition of Francisco “Eco” Dangla III for a temporary protection order. “A temporary protection order is issued an interim relief against respondents and all the persons and entities acting and operating under their directions, instructions, and orders, prohibiting them from entering within a radius of one kilometer of the persons, places of residence, work, or present locations, of petitioner, as well as those of his immediate family,” the resolution read.

Philippine police to investigate Duterte’s ‘death squad’ claims (October 2024)
The Philippine police said they will investigate revelations made by former President Rodrigo Duterte that he assembled a “death squad” to control crime when he was mayor of the southern city of Davao. Duterte had pointed at former police officers present at a Senate inquiry into his deadly “war on drugs” on Monday as leaders of that death squad, the existence of which the former president and his allies had for years denied.

American activist blacklisted, barred from entering the Philippines (October 2024)
A U.S-based activist was barred from entering the Philippines to attend the national congress of human rights group Karapatan. Copeland Downs, chairperson of the Portland Committee for Human Rights in the Philippines (PCHRP), arrived in Manila on to observe Karapatan’s 6th national congress. His luggage was searched and his passport was held.

Duterte PNP chiefs urged to clarify role in drug war (October 2024)
Former Philippine National Police chiefs in the administration of former president Rodrigo Duterte should clarify their roles in the bloody war on drugs, after the revelation of retired police lieutenant colonel Royina Garma of a cash reward system for killing drug suspects, PNP chief Gen. Rommel Francisco Marbil said. Marbil issued the call to the former PNP chiefs following what he described as serious allegations made by Garma that Duterte and other high-ranking officials of his administration sanctioned covert operations which replicated the “Davao model” of extrajudicial killings on a national scale.

Disappearance of 2 activists a ‘professional operation’ (September 2024)
The enforced disappearance of activists James Jazmines and Felix Salaveria Jr. was a “professional operation,” a human rights lawyer said, citing security camera footage taken early this month. The 63-year-old Jazmines, younger brother of former National Democratic Front of the Philippines consultant Alan Jazmines, went missing on August 23 after attending Salaveria’s 66th birthday party at a restaurant in Tabaco City, Albay province.

Philippines still deadliest country in Asia for environmental defenders (September 2024)
The Philippines remains the most dangerous country in Asia for land and environmental defenders, accounting for 68% of the recorded killings and enforced disappearances in the region in 2023, the watchdog Global Witness found. Of the 25 defenders in Asia whose lives were taken away in 2023, 17 of them came from the Philippines, where 10 were killed and seven have disappeared.

Disappearance of 2 activists a ‘professional operation’ (September 2024)
The enforced disappearance of activists James Jazmines and Felix Salaveria Jr. was a “professional operation,” a human rights lawyer said, citing security camera footage taken early this month. The 63-year-old Jazmines, who is the younger brother of former National Democratic Front of the Philippines consultant Alan Jazmines, went missing on August 23 after attending Salaveria’s 66th birthday party at a restaurant in Tabaco City, Albay province.

House OKs resolution tasking panels to jointly probe illegal gaming and drugs (August 2024)
The House of Representatives has adopted a resolution tasking four committees to jointly probe different but intertwined issues – illegal activities linked to Philippine offshore gaming operators (Pogo), the presence of illegal drugs, and the alleged rights violations in the drug war. The adoption of HR No. 1880 comes after Senior Deputy Speaker Aurelio Gonzales Jr. delivered a privilege speech, highlighting the importance of a coordinated approach to pressing issues faced by the country today.

Public inquiry on red-tagging launched (July 2024)
The Commission on Human Rights (CHR) has launched a public inquiry on red-tagging incidents targeting rights defenders. “This public inquiry is a product of CHR’s proactive approach toward fostering a constructive dialogue across all stakeholders on the phenomenon of red-tagging,” CHR Chairman Richard Palpal-latoc said. “We recognize it as a widespread practice and a matter of serious concern that may pose grave threats to one’s life, liberty and security. We hope this inquiry will help us come up with concrete recommendations to ultimately address the situation.”

4 youth activists from Southern Tagalog file charges against military officials (July 2024)
Four youth human rights defenders filed civil and criminal complaints against former 59th Infantry Battalion commander Lt. Col. Ernesto Teneza Jr., 16 military officers, and five other witnesses before the Office of the Ombudsman on July 19. The filing comes just days before Ferdinand Marcos Jr.’s third State of the Nation Address (SONA).

NGO questions AMLC power to freeze its bank accounts at Court of Appeals (June 2024)
An NGO that pioneered community-based disaster management questioned before the Court of Appeals (CA) the basis for freezing its bank account on May 10 by the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC). CDRC is the Citizens’ Disaster Response Network (CDRN) secretariat, which has regional partners nationwide that prioritize the most affected communities during disasters. According to the AMLC, CDRC is the direct recipient of funds from the bank accounts of Leyte Center for Development Inc. (LCDe), which are subject to a separate freeze order.

27 individuals to face trial for ‘funding NPA’ (June 2024)
For allegedly extending financial help to the front of the New People’s Army (NPA) in Negros Oriental, 27 individuals, mostly members of progressive groups, will be facing trial before a court in Cebu City. The accused, reportedly members of the NGO Community Empowerment Resource Network (Cernet), are charged with violating Republic Act (RA) 10168, or the Terrorism Financing Prevention and Suppression Act of 2012, before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) Branch 74, for delivering P135,000 to the NPA-South East Front in Dumaguete City in September 2012. Activist Jaime Paglinawan, one of the accused, told SunStar Cebu that the government’s claim that Cernet is funding NPA is unfounded.

Red-tagged NGO cries foul after bank accounts frozen (May 2024)
An NGO working for depressed communities in Eastern Visayas has expressed outrage over the decision of the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to freeze its bank account and that of its staff members and suppliers. Jazmin Jerusalem, executive director of the Leyte Center for Development (LCDe) based in Palo town, Leyte, said the NGO would contest the sanctions imposed by the AMLC, which stemmed from the military’s accusation linking the group to the communist insurgency.

False “terrorism” charges against Philippine CSOs undermine people’s right to development (May 2024)
Philippine CSOs, Paghida-et sa Kauswagan Development Group (PDG) and the Leyte Centre for Development (LCDe), are falsely accused of “terrorist financing” charges. Five members of PDG, a local CSO in Kabankalan, Negros Occidental province, face false charges of violation of Republic Act No. 10168, a counterterrorism financing law. Former PDG Executive Director Clarissa Ramos is among these five individuals. Her husband, human rights lawyer and PDG member Benjamin Ramos, was murdered by unidentified assailants in November 2018. Meanwhile, the bank accounts of LCDe, and the personal bank accounts of its Executive Director Jazmin Aguisanda Jerusalem, have been frozen for alleged violation of the same law.

Philippines’ Marcos forms toothless rights ‘super body’ (May 2024)
President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has created a “super body” to promote human rights protection in the Philippines. On paper, the Special Committee on Human Rights Coordination looks impressive, and its stated purpose is admirable. But as constructed, the body will have little authority to address the serious rights abuses facing the country.

Lawmaker files criminal complaint vs former President Duterte (October 2023)
ACT Teachers Party-list Representative France Castro filed criminal complaints against former President Rodrigo Duterte in relation to the threats he made against the latter during a television interview. Castro filed charges for violation of Article 282 of the Revised Penal Code or grave threats against Duterte before the Quezon City Prosecutor’s Office. In an interview, Castro expressed belief that the threats against her by Duterte are related to her efforts to look into the confidential funds of the Department of Education (DepEd), as well as of the Office of the Vice President (OVP), which is both under Vice President Sara Duterte-Carpio.

Groups denounce perjury raps vs environmental defenders (October 2023)
Environmental and human rights groups condemned the filing of perjury cases against two anti-reclamation activists who accused the military of abduction, labeling the move as judicial harassment. The Department of National Defense filed perjury and grave slander complaints against Jonila Castro and Jhed Tamano, who revealed at a press conference hosted by the National Task Force to End Local Communist Armed Conflict last September 19 that the military had abducted them.

Nobel laureate Maria Ressa acquitted in Philippines tax evasion case (September 2023)
Maria Ressa, a Nobel prize winner and co-founder of the online news site Rappler, has been acquitted of a tax evasion charge in the Philippines, another legal victory in her battle against multiple charges filed during the government of former president Rodrigo Duterte.

Activists Jonila Castro, Jhed Tamano seek protective writs from SC (September 2023)
The two environmental activists who disappeared last September 2 have filed an appeal urging the Supreme Court to issue a writ of amparo and writ of habeas data against members of the Philippines Army, Philippine National Police (PNP), and some government agencies. Jonila Castro and Jhed Tamano filed the two protective writs as they are “insecure about their physical safety as respondents know where they and their families reside” and are “concerned with the genuineness of the alleged information that Respondents have threatened to release.”

Anti-terrorism complaints vs Southern Tagalog activists alarm group (July 2023)
Human rights group Karapatan has expressed alarm that the filing of criminal complaints against activists for alleged violations of the controversial Anti-Terrorism Act has become a “fast-emerging pattern” in the Southern Tagalog region. “This sets a dangerous precedent that seeks to foist a chilling effect in rural and indigenous communities in the region,” Karapatan said in a statement.

Gov’t designates 4 Cordillera IP activists as ‘terrorists’ (July 2023)
The Anti-Terrorism Council (ATC) designated four leaders of the Cordillera Peoples Alliance (CPA) as “terrorists” – less than a month after the group sought a writ of amparo before the Supreme Court (SC). The designation will allow the Anti-Money Laundering Council (AMLC) to investigate and freeze the financial assets and properties of the tagged individuals.

ICC Appeals Chamber rejects PH plea to stop probe into Duterte’s war on drugs (July 2023)
The Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court (ICC) has rejected the Philippine government’s appeal to stop the investigation into the Duterte administration’s deadly war against drugs. Presiding Judge Marc Perrin de Brichambaut read the decision as the division handed down its ruling that had already been brushed off by the Philippine government even before it came out. Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla had earlier said it would not execute arrest warrants that might eventually stem from the resumption of the probe.

Karapatan seeks junking of ‘frivolous’ indirect contempt case filed by VACC lawyer (July 2023)
Calling the indirect contempt case “frivolous,” human rights group Karapatan has asked the Muntinlupa Regional Trial Court to dismiss the case filed by Atty. Ferdinand Topacio of the Volunteers Against Crime and Corruption (VACC).

ICC Appeals Chamber denies Philippines’ request to suspend ‘drug war’ probe (March 2023)
The Philippines failed to convince the Appeals Chamber of the International Criminal Court to suspend the investigation of the tribunal’s prosecutor into the alleged crimes against humanity committed in the course of the “war on drugs.” In an eight-page decision issued at The Hague in The Netherlands, the Appeals Chamber said it “rejects the request of the Republic of the Philippines for suspensive effect” of the Pre-Trial Chamber’s decision.”

Philippines won’t stop ‘red-tagging’ (March 2023)
The Philippines’ refusal to accept the United Nations recommendation to end the practice of “red-tagging” indicated the lack of commitment by the government to stop the practice, the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) said. In plenary session, the Human Rights Council adopted on Monday the fourth Universal Periodic Review (UPR) report on the Philippines’ human rights record. The report highlighted views and recommendations on unresolved human rights violations, including extrajudicial killings, enforced disappearances, illegal detention, torture and other forms of human rights violations.

United Nations special rapporteur for extrajudicial killings will arrive to the Philippines (February 2023)
The United Nations special rapporteur for extrajudicial killings will be in the country this week to help build capacity of forensic pathologists as the Department of Justice (DOJ) seeks to improve its investigations on wrongful deaths. But Justice Secretary Jesus Crispin Remulla clarified that Chilean physician Morris Tidball-Binz is not doing so in his capacity as UN special rapporteur but as a forensic pathology expert to train some of the country’s doctors in assisting law enforcement agencies.

SIM card registration law to take effect before end of 2022 (November 2022)
Senator Grace Poe has said that the SIM Card Registration Act, which aims to fight text scams and spam, is expected to take effect on December 27, even as uncertainties remain about whether the law will actually work. Under the SIM Card Registration Act, those who already own a SIM card would be required to register with telcos within a given period, while those who have yet to purchase one will be required to submit a valid identification document to the telcos and direct sellers.

Philippines invites special rapporteur  to visit in 2023 (November 2022)
The Philippines has invited a third special rapperteur as part of capacity building on human rights under the United Nations Joint Programme. Morris Tidball-Binz, a medical doctor from Chile who specializes in forensic science, human rights and humanitarian action, is currently the UN special rapporteur on extrajudicial, summary, or arbitrary killings. Mama Fatima Singhateh — special rapporteur on the sale and sexual exploitation of children — and Irene Khan — on freedom of expression and media — are already scheduled to visit the country.

Court of Appeals denies Maria Ressa’s appeal in cyber libel case (October 2022)
The Court of Appeals (CA) denied the motion for reconsideration filed by Nobel Peace Prize laureate and Rappler CEO Maria Ressa and former Rappler researcher Reynaldo Santos Jr. over their cyber libel case. In a statement, Nobel Peace laureate Ressa said she is “disappointed” but not surprised by the ruling. “The ongoing campaign of harassment and intimidation against me and Rappler continues, and the Philippines legal system is not doing enough to stop it. I am disappointed by today’s ruling but sadly not surprised,” Ressa said.

Nuns among 16 charged for link to ‘terrorism’ financing of CPP, NPA (August 2022)

Court halts NTC from blocking access to Bulatlat website (August 2022)

Conviction of Ressa for cyberlibel upheld (July 2022)

SEC affirms revocation of Rappler’s certificate of incorporation (June 2022)

‘Tinang 83’ cleared of malicious mischief, illegal assembly charges (June 2022)

No permit, no public gathering in Manila — Mayor Isko (May 2022)

Supreme Court upholds with finality most of anti-terror law (April 2022)

Duterte vetoes SIM card and social media registration bill (April 2022)

Solicitor General calls on Supreme Court to void fact-check deal (April 2022)

Mandatory SIM card registration puts privacy at risk (April 2022)

ICC prosecutor vows to ‘uncover truth, ensure accountability’ in drug war probe (October 2021)

Why is PH ranking low in rule of law global index? (October 2021)

Rights group calls for review on cases with search warrants (July 2021)

Supreme Court condemns lawyer killings and vows changes (March 2021)

UN urges probe into killing of Philippine activists (March 2021)

ICC finds basis for crimes against humanity in Duterte drug war (December 2020)

Rights Defenders, Journalists Challenge Anti-Terrorism Act (July 2020)