New legislation that would grant the Philippine president powers similar to martial law comes amid claims by critics that he made up the alleged ‘Red October’ coup plot to justify a crackdown on the opposition</s>The Congress of the Philippines is rushing approval of a new law that could give President Rodrigo Duterte wide-ranging powers similar to those of his idol, the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos.

The death penalty will be restored. Torture, allowed. Filipinos could be jailed for their posts on Facebook, Twitter and other social media. Suspected terrorists and even “unwilling witnesses” could be arrested without warrants and detained for 30 days without charge during an “actual or imminent terrorist attack”.

These are just some of the amendments proposed by Philippine security officials to the current Human Security Act of 2007 or Republic Act 9372.

The proposals come amid claims by the Duterte administration that the armed wing of the Communist Party of the Philippines, the New People’s Army, together with opposition political parties and civil society groups, has been plotting a coup called “Red October” to overthrow the president.

However, the claims have been rubbished by critics, who say the plot has been made up to justify a crackdown on the opposition and pave the way for martial law.

In a Senate hearing on Monday, defence secretary Delfin Lorenzana pushed for approval of the new law, saying: “We won’t need to use martial law if we have something else that would give our security agencies a bit more teeth.”

Armed Forces chief of staff General Carlito Galvez, Jnr. said there was a need for longer detention periods, pointing to the recent twin bombings in Isulan, Sultan Kudarat in Mindanao which took place within five days of each other, in August and September.

“We captured the bomber. But because of a very permissive law [requiring their release in 72 hours], the bombers were able to be released from detention,” General Galvez said. Both incidents have been blamed on Islamist terrorists.

At present, Galvez said, “we cannot detain” under mere suspicion alone. It usually took up to two weeks to extract information from a “hard core terrorist”, he said.

Both Galvez and presidential national security adviser Hermogenes Esperon expressed envy for the “more restrictive” laws of other Asian countries. Australia can detain suspects “for as long as seven days or more [whereas] we can only detain suspects for three days”, former military chief Esperon said.

Human rights lawyer Antonio Gabriel La Viña, however, warned the proposals would legalise “state terrorism”. He called the amendments “repugnant to the sacred constitutional doctrine of due process of law which protects life, liberty and property of any person and the right of an accused to be heard and present evidence in his or her behalf”.

Law professor La Viña also sided with left-wing congressman Ariel Casilao, saying that the law was “another step toward a dictatorship”.

Former congressman Teddy Casiño of the Bayan Muna party list group called the proposals “very dangerous” because they “expand the definition of terrorism to virtually any crime under the sun”.

The present law specifies only a dozen high crimes including piracy and mutiny, rebellion or insurrection, coup d’etat, murder, kidnapping and serious illegal detention, arson, and use of nuclear or toxic substances.

‘My only sin is the extrajudicial killings,’ says Philippine President Duterte

However, these crimes can be considered terrorist acts only when they sow and create “a condition of widespread and extraordinary fear and panic among the populace, in order to coerce the government to give in to an unlawful demand”. Security officials have proposed to delete this condition from the law.

In addition, they have inserted the violation of Republic Act 10175 or the Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 as a terrorist act. Since RA 10175 had specified that it covers the entire Philippine Penal Code, the insertion would affect a wide array of laws.

Because of this, Casiño warned that “the amendments make terrorism so broad and vague a crime it can be used against anyone – leftist organisations, tree-huggers, anti-corruption watchdogs, political enemies of those in power, even drug suspects and petty criminals”.

Other notable deletions are the sections banning torture during interrogation. Section 23 of the current RA 9372 required law enforcement workers to keep a logbook on each detainee. Section 24 specified that “no torture or coercion in investigation and interrogation” is allowed. Any evidence extracted in this manner is inadmissible.

Both sections 23 and 24 have been deleted in a draft proposed by security officials.

However, Senator Panfilo Lacson, who chairs the Senate Committee on Public Order and Dangerous Drugs, said he had tweaked the Senate version of the bill by restoring section 24 against torture, but not section 23.

Duterte: If I step down, bring back Marcos to run Philippines

Lacson has also proposed to insert a section that specifies that “legitimate exercises of the freedom of expression and to peaceably assemble … protest, dissent” would not be considered terrorist acts provided “a person does not have the intention to use or urge the use of force or violence or cause harm to others”.

Coincidentally, two of the main sponsors of the bill – Senator Lacson and House Congressman Amado Espino, Jnr. – were once both officers in the Philippine Constabulary under Marcos. The constabulary was found to have engaged in massive human rights violations of detainees, according to one of its former officials, General Ramon Montaño.

Human rights groups have estimated that 3,700 people were murdered, 40,000 tortured and up to 100,000 detained without charge during the Marcos dictatorship.</s>Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte’s anti-drug campaign that has left thousands dead has saved the country from becoming a “narco-state,” the country’s top diplomat has told the United Nations.

Speaking before the UN’s 73rd General Assembly in New York on Saturday, Foreign Secretary Alan Peter Cayetano said that Duterte’s war on drugs was meant to protect the citizenry from its effects and that suspected drug dealers and addicts killed were slain in legitimate operations.

“As a sovereign and democratic country led by duly-elected president, we are on track in salvaging our deteriorating country from becoming a narco-state or a state held hostage by the high and powerful who ignore the plight of the poor, powerless and marginalized or both,” Cayetano said in a speech, copies of which were made available Monday.

He said that the government respected human rights for all, although the government would not shirk its responsibility if made to choose between an innocent civilian and a drug trafficker.

“In cases where we have to choose between protecting the rights of law-abiding citizens and law enforcers versus the rights of drug lords and criminals, it is clear we will protect the former,” Cayetano said. “Who wouldn’t? Wouldn’t you do the same?”

His statement came two days after Duterte for the first time openly acknowledged that extrajudicial killings had happened in his 2-year-old government.

“My only sin is the extrajudicial killings,” Duterte said on Thursday, the first time that he had acknowledged that state agents had acted under presidential orders.

Earlier, he had maintained that the estimated 4,500 drug addicts and dealers slain in the drug war were killed when they put up a fight against police officers.

Rights groups have placed the number of those slain at close to 12,000 – a shocking figure that eclipses the number of activists slain during the 20-year authoritarian rule of Ferdinand Marcos, who was toppled by a civilian-back military revolt in 1986.

Not an admission, spokesman says

Presidential spokesman Harry Roque insisted on Monday that the president’s statement did not amount to an admission because “he did not explicitly admit to the crime of murder.”

“I’d like to emphasize that there is actually no crime under domestic law or international law as EJK,” Roque told reporters, using the local acronym for extrajudicial killings.

“In fact this is a misleading term because killing in our Constitution and in our laws is never legal so there is no such thing as extrajudicial killings. So it’s either a lawful killing or an unlawful killing,” he said.

He said that some critics were quick to jump on the statement because they think that it would bolster their complaints before the Hague-based ICC, where Duterte faces two complaints of murder and crimes against humanity, one of which was filed by relatives of people slain in the drug war.

Duterte has been angered by the ICC and as withdrawn the Philippines from an international treaty that created the court. But experts have pointed out that the withdrawal process would take a full year after a country files its notice of abrogation.

Roque reiterated that “there is no pending preliminary investigation in the ICC as of yet.”

He emphasized that the ICC could not assume on taking on the case because the Philippines has a “working criminal justice system.”

“Those who have complaints against the president, better file their complaints against him here in the Philippines,” he said.

But Vice President Maria Leonor Robredo said the president’s admission could only work against him.

“First of all, that’s long been debated. A lot of people say extrajudicial killings exist. The government denies it. It seems to be a confirmation that the critics are right in saying that a lot of these killings are above the law,” Robredo said.

The Philippine leader has previously removed Robredo from his cabinet, accusing her of undermining his government.

Robredo, a lawyer and a known critic of Duterte’s war on drugs, said she found it insulting for the families who lost their loved ones to the anti-drug campaign when government officials clarified the president was not serious in his public admission.

“There is no stronger piece of evidence than a confession,” she said. “That in itself is evidence.”

Jeoffrey Maitem from Cotabato City contributed to this report.</s>Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte raised questions about his health on Thursday when he said in a public address that he had gone to a hospital for tests, a day after he missed a cabinet meeting and another event.

Duterte has disappeared from public view before. He was not seen for a week last year, fuelling speculation he was ill. The government insisted then the speculation was baseless.

But this was the first time he seemed to confirm he might have health problems.

"I don't know where I'm now physically, but I have to wait for that," Duterte told a dinner he hosted for soldiers and police officers at the presidential palace in Manila, in a speech that was televised nationally.

"But, I will tell you if it's cancer, it's cancer. If it's third stage, no more treatment. I will not prolong the agony in this office or anywhere."

Salvador Medialdea, an official in his executive, confirmed the president underwent a colonoscopy on Wednesday, a procedure the president "submits to on a yearly basis." He underwent the same test three weeks ago, but his doctors wanted to get more tissue samples, Duterte said.

Presidential spokesperson Harry Roque told a news briefing early Thursday that Duterte got tired and took a day off, denying rumours he had been admitted to a hospital.

Duterte, who has received international condemnation for extrajudicial crackdowns on drug users, said last year he had used fentanyl after a motorcycle accident and soon felt "on cloud nine." He then claimed to be joking about the fentanyl and admonished reporters for taking his claim seriously.

Known for a busy schedule and long speeches, often several a day, the 73-year-old Duterte's frequent disappearances have fuelled rumours he is in declining health and that the government is trying to keep that under wraps.

After a trip to Israel and Jordan last month, Duterte said his skin was burned by his long exposure to desert sun when the public noticed discoloration in his face.

Before addressing Congress in late July, Duterte also made a routine check at a hospital and his aides were quick to say there was nothing wrong with his health.</s>The South China Morning Post (SCMP) has long been a bastion of anti-Beijing rhetoric with long standing ties to pro-British factions in Hong Kong. Although the SCMP is now owned by the Alibaba Group of Jack Ma, the editorial line has if anything become more brazen and provocative than under its former owners.

But beyond attacking the Chinese government, the SCMP has taken a radically liberal/yellow line on Philippine politics with President Rodrigo Duterte being a favourite target of abuse. Of course the editorial line of the SCMP is not the concern of the Philippine government, but when the newspaper spreads outrageous and unsubstantiated allegations about the Philippine President it is only fitting and proper for the government to raise an official complaint against the newspaper.

On the 3rd of October, the SCMP published a piece by resident Duterte hater Raissa Robles entitled, “Philippines plans law to give Duterte Marcos-like powers”. Virtually everything Robles writes is contrary to the reality of the political situation in The Philippines. According to Robles,

“The death penalty will be restored. Torture, allowed. Filipinos could be jailed for their posts on Facebook, Twitter and other social media. Suspected terrorists and even “unwilling witnesses” could be arrested without warrants and detained for 30 days without charge during an “actual or imminent terrorist attack”.

These are just some of the amendments proposed by Philippine security officials to the current Human Security Act of 2007 or Republic Act 9372″.

The facts tell a different story. While President Duterte has stated that he is in favour of restoring capital punishment (something that has been done before in recent Philippine history) and while Congress passed a bill authorising the re-institution of the death penalty, the Senate has effectively left the bill in legislative purgatory. Little progress on the issue has been made as a result and as things stand, capital punishment does not exist in The Philippines.

Secondly, no one anywhere in Philippine politics is discussing jailing anyone over social media posts. The fact that Filipinos are among the most active social media posters in the world indicates that if anything, the online freedoms of Filipinos are only expanding. As for detaining terrorists for longer periods of time, two Senators, neither of whom are members of President Duterte’s PDP-Laban party have introduced proposals for increasing the detention time of suspected terrorists in light of recent jihadist bombings in Mindanao.

Senators Panfilo Lacson and Gregorio Honasan have proposed expanding the period which suspected terrorists can be detained from a mere three days to thirty, thus bringing The Philippines in-line with most moderate international standards. The proposals also include some modest beefing up of intelligence gathering activities in respect of anti-terror police.

It is also crucial to remember that these proposals appear to be a long way from becoming law. While the SCMP piece claims that these proposals are far more severe than they are, while falsely ascribing them to the President, the reality is that the Presidential administration has said that Duterte is not going to declare nation wide martial law nor anything remotely similar as it is President Duterte’s view that the ongoing red-yellow conspiracy to bring down his presidency seeks to provoke the President into declaring martial law. Therefore, Duterte has made it clear that he has no intention of playing into the hands of the conspirators.

While President Duterte is in favour of a tough approach to cracking down on jihadist and far-left terrorism, the article does not accurately reflect the ways in which the Presidential administration seeks to implement a tougher stance on both local and internationally affiliated terror groups including Daesh (ISIS) which currently has cells active in Mindanao.

By publishing such a provocative piece that totally misrepresents the reality in of President Duterte’s security aims, the SCMP has insulting the integrity of The Philippine nation and of all of Rodrigo Roa Duterte’s millions of supporters. Not only should the newspaper retract its allegations but its editorial staff and owners should apologise to President Duterte in writing for insulting his dignity and misrepresenting his policies.</s>MANILA, Philippines >> Philippine leader Rodrigo Duterte told President Barack Obama “you can go to hell” in a speech Tuesday that was his strongest tirade so far against the U.S. over its criticism of his deadly anti-drug campaign, adding that he may eventually decide to “break up with America.”

He also lashed out anew at the European Union, saying the bloc, which has also criticized his brutal crackdown, “better choose purgatory, hell is filled up.”

Since becoming president in June, Deuterte has had an uneasy relationship with the U.S. and with Obama and has declared intentions to bolster relations with China and Russia as he revamps Philippine foreign policy that has long leaned on Washington.

The brash-speaking leader also has been hypersensitive to criticism over his anti-drug crackdown, which has left more than an estimated 3,000 suspected drug dealers and pushers dead in just three months, alarming the United Nations, the EU, the U.S. and human rights watchdogs.

In a speech before a local convention attended by officials and business executives, Duterte outlined his disappointments with the U.S., which has asked his government to stop the widespread killings and has questioned whether human rights are being violated. He also described Washington as an unreliable ally, saying Filipino forces have not benefited from joint combat exercises with U.S. troops.

“Instead of helping us, the first to criticize is this State Department, so you can go to hell, Mr. Obama, you can go to hell,” Duterte said. Then addressing the EU, he said: “Better choose purgatory, hell is filled up.”

In a later speech at a synagogue in Makati city in the Manila metropolis, Duterte warned he may decide to “break up with America” in his most serious threat so far to push relations back with Washington.

“Eventually I might, in my time, I will break up with America,” he said without elaborating. “I would rather go to Russia and to China.”

Duterte has given assurances that he would not abrogate a 1951 Mutual Defense Treaty with the U.S. and will maintain the long alliance with America, one of his country’s largest trading partners and provider of development and military aid and defense equipment.

The U.S. has expressed concern over the extrajudicial killings and urged Duterte’s government to ensure law enforcement efforts comply with human rights obligations. Last month, Obama canceled a planned first meeting with Duterte on the sidelines of an Asian summit in Laos after the Filipino leader blurted “son of a bitch” in warning the U.S. leader not to lecture him on human rights ahead of their meeting. Duterte later expressed regrets over his remarks.

Angered by U.S. criticism, Duterte has made a series of public pronouncements that he could scale back the activities and presence of visiting U.S. troops in the country.

Last week, Duterte said the joint U.S.-Philippine combat exercises to be held this week, the first of his presidency, would also be the last of his tenure. The exercises, centering on amphibious landing drills, started Tuesday under some uncertainty because of those remarks.

Marine commanders from both sides said at the opening ceremony that the exercises, involving 1,100 American and 400 Filipino military personnel, are aimed at improving readiness by the two countries to respond to a range of crises while deepening their historic ties.

U.S. Embassy officials said Washington has not been formally notified by the Philippine government of any move to scrap other planned drills. Such a move by the Philippines would impede Washington’s plans to expand the footprint of U.S. forces in Southeast Asia to counter China.

A Philippine military spokesman for the ongoing exercises, Capt. Ryan Lacuesta, sidestepped the question of whether Duterte’s remarks have affected the troops and the atmosphere of the drills.

U.S. Marine Brig. Gen. John Jansen said that aside from promoting regional security, the exercises have helped save lives in terms of fostering more rapid and organized responses to disasters like Typhoon Haiyan in 2013.

“Our alliance remains a key source of stability in the Asia-Pacific region,” Jansen said, expressing confidence “that we will continue to build our partnership and capabilities together.”

While the Obama administration maintains that its alliance with the Philippines remains “ironclad,” a senior U.S. diplomat cautioned Duterte last week against more anti-U.S. posturing. Many of Duterte’s stunning pronouncements have typically been walked back by other Philippines officials.

“I think it would be a serious mistake in a democratic country like the Philippines to underestimate the power of the public’s affinity for the U.S. That’s people power,” Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Russel told The Associated Press.

Russel did not draw a direct comparison, but past Philippine presidents have been toppled by popular protests dubbed “people power,” including former dictator Ferdinand Marcos, who was ousted in 1986.</s>Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte has raised questions about his health when he said in a public address that he had gone to a hospital for tests, one day after he missed a cabinet meeting and another event.

Duterte has disappeared from public view before. He was not seen for a week last year, fuelling speculation he was ill. The government insisted then the speculation was baseless.

But this was the first time he seemed to confirm he might have health problems.

“I don’t know where I’m now physically, but I have to wait for that,” Duterte told a dinner he hosted for soldiers and police officers at the presidential palace, in a speech that was televised nationally.

“But, I will tell you if its cancer, it’s cancer. If it’s third stage, no more treatment. I will not prolong the agony in this office or anywhere.”

Executive secretary Salvador Medialdea confirmed the president underwent a colonoscopy on Wednesday, a procedure the president “submits to on a yearly basis”. He underwent the same test three weeks ago, but his doctors wanted to get more tissue samples, Duterte said.

But presidential spokesman Harry Roque told a news briefing early on Thursday Duterte got tired and took a day off, denying rumours he had been admitted to a hospital.

Known for a busy schedule and long speeches, often several a day, the 73-year-old Duterte’s frequent disappearances have fuelled rumours he is in declining health and that the government is trying to keep that under wraps.

After a trip to Israel and Jordan last month, Duterte said his skin was burned by his long exposure to desert sun when the public notice discoloration in his face.

Before addressing Congress in late July, Duterte also made a routine check at a hospital and his aides were quick to say there was nothing wrong with his health.

The announcement comes days after he admitted for the first time to authorising extrajudicial killings as part of his war on drugs in the Philippines.

Duterte made the admission during a speech at the presidential palace last week, where he directly challenged anyone who criticised how he ran the country. “I told the military, what is my fault? Did I steal even one peso?” said Duterte. “My only sin is the extrajudicial killings.”</s>Top members of the Philippine military are making sweeping claims that militant communists have infiltrated the country’s leading places of learning.

The quoted Brig. Gen. Antonio Parlade Jr. as saying Wednesday that the New People’s Army (NPA), the armed wing of the Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP), was trying to recruit students at 18 campuses in the country’s capital, including those of the prestigious University of the Philippines, De La Salle University, and Ateneo University.

Communist agents were showing videos of human rights atrocities to students, to incite them “to rebel against the government,” and casting Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte “as the new Marcos,” said Parlade, the military’s assistant deputy chief of staff for operations. He was referring to the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos, who ruled the Philippines from 1965 to 1986.

Parlade’s remarks were played down by a statement Thursday from the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP), which conceded that its allegations against several tertiary institutions were “subject to continuing validation.”

Nevertheless, tensions remain high given Duterte’s recent claims that the NPA was planning to assassinate him and the rebel group’s ongoing insurrection, which has claimed an estimated 30,000 lives since the 1960s.

Duterte had initially appointed several leftist lawmakers to his cabinet in an attempt to boost peace negations with the communists, but formally ended talks last November amid deadly skirmishes between soldiers and the NPA.

Parlade’s claims came a day after General Carlito Galvez, the AFP’s Chief of Staff, warned Philippine Senators that universities had become recruiting grounds for a “Red October” plot to overthrow the government.

However, Galvez denied Duterte’s claim that he was the target of a so-called “yellow-red” plot between the opposition Liberal Party (LP) and the CCP.

“It’s important that the military chief struck down Duterte’s yellow-red plot conspiracy theory,” author and analyst Richard Heydarian tells TIME. He praised the military for its “institutional independence despite the constant political pressure” and described it as “quite paradoxically, a pillar of democracy under Duterte’s rule.”

Marcos used plots against him to justify military rule. A series of bomb attacks Marcos attributed to communists preceded his declaration of martial law in 1972, under which thousands of activists and university students were tortured, jailed, and killed. NPA membership also swelled over that period, from 60 members in 1969 to a peak of about 25,000 in 1987, according to military estimates.

Though he recently ruled out nationwide martial law for the Philippines, Duterte has frequently threatened to declare it in the past, particularly if he meets with opposition to a bloody war on drugs that has seen thousands killed.

Duterte’s talk of “destabilization” — one of his favorite themes — has also escalated in recent weeks.

In September, he accused allies of Senator Antonio Trillanes IV, whose amnesty he controversially revoked, of conspiring with the CPP and members of the Liberal Party to overthrow him. He also challenged the army to stage a coup d’etat.

Nona al-Raschid, a 20-year-old participant in demonstrations commemorating the 46th anniversary of the imposition martial law on Sept. 21 1972, told TIME earlier that claims of an NPA threat were “fear mongering.”

“They tag us as communist terrorists in order to make our claims seem less legitimate,” al-Rahid said. “If you are a communist you are an enemy of the state, and if you are an enemy of the state that’s free rein for you to be killed.”

Meanwhile, Philippine National Police (PNP) chief, director general Oscar Albayalde, told a media press conference Thursday that academics who encourage “rebellious” ideas among their students would face charges.</s>Rodrigo Duterte has made international headlines as much for his aggressive policies as for his aggressive statements which range from questioning the existence of God and desire to slaughter drug addicts to hurling extremely offensive expletives towards former US President Barack Obama.

Now, the President of the Philippines could be armed with even more power, power that could make him virtually invincible in his country.

The country's Congress is on the cusp of approving amendments in the existing Human Security Act of 2007. What this means that soon, Philippines could jail people for their posts on social media, death penalty could be brought back and torture could be made a state-approved tactic against accused.

If the approvals do come, groups which have been highlighting violation of human rights in the country could be even more enraged but many feel their voices would be curtailed even further. And while state officials say that the amendments are necessary due to terror threats that the country faces, opposition leaders have claimed that these are the false pretext on the basis of which, Duterte is hegemonizing his rule and power.

In the past, Duterte has angered more than just his political rivals due to his statements. The most criticised of his quotes, perhaps, was when he said he would resign if anyone could prove that God exists. This evoked a sharp reaction with a Catholic bishop terming him a 'psycopath.'
The Congress of the Philippines proposes a new law that could give Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte wide-ranging powers similar to Ferdinand Marcos.