Political prisoner speaks out ON MAY 5 this year Saturnino, "Satur' Ocampo, escaped from a Philippine gaol after ten years as a political prisoner. An ex-student leader and then journalist, Satur began his struggle after the declaration of martial law in 1972. Arrested in January 1975, and accused of subversive activity, he was imprisoned and tortured for several months on end. He was considered to be an important leader of the underground Communist Party of the Philippines (CCP). As a political detainee Satur continued his struggle by leading the movement of political prisoners and working for the release of his comrades.
which the elections were conducted.
The militant monitoring by NAMFREL of the elections provided ml some credibility to the results of the th elections, particularly in metropolitan of Manila, where the KBL [New Society re Movement] of Marcos was trounced.
Use
Q. What was the significance of Di the boycott campaign? po
A. The boycott campaign was the a manifestation of the people, the SU broader opposition to Marcos, which did not consider the parliamentary elections as essentially responding to the need for change. fo
But as it turned out, the boycott movement had very little time. And be while it was able to generate a lot th of support, it was not able to counter- rel act the great enthusiasm of the people ral to go to the polls and repudiate ar the Marcos government through the ch ballot. be
This indicated that a lot of Filipinos og still believe the electoral process
We publish below an interview Satur was still in prison.
Question. What has been the impact of the August 1983 assassination of Benigno Aquino? Has the movement against Marcos become stronger in the last year?
Answer. Definitely yes. This is particularly true of the open, legal democratic movement, although there has also been an intensification of the armed struggle in the countryside.
Before the assassination of Aquino, the street demonstrations were essentially made up of workers, students, and the more radical side of the opposition to Marcos. But in the wake of the Aquino assassination the so-called legal forces, including the representatives of business, more church people, and more of the dutiful, conservative elements of society, saw the truth - that if a man of Aquino's stature could be done away with in the way he was killed, then it could happen to anybody.
So it was something like a catalyst. The people sought some catharsis for their hatred, for their pent-up anger against the regime. This became worse as the economic crisis worsened, with the flight of some capital and nervousness in the business community. Then there was also the repatriation of foreign exchange by people who had been investing here or who had been keeping their money in banks here.
Q. The Aquino assassination, of course, has only been one more incident in which the Marcos government has been implicated. There 14 conducted by Deb Snookal when are so many cases of murders, disappearances, and so on. What did Aquino mean to the Filipino people? A. At first when Aquino was killed, some people thought that he was just one of the victims ot the military depredations. But in the course of the popular response of the people, of the protest and anger against the regime, Aquino's murder became an oustanding example that the regime or those responsible for these killings and "salvagings" [summary executions] would not respect even those in the elite of Filipino society.
Q. What would be your balance sheet of the May parliamentary elections? It has been suggested that Marcos used the elections to present a facade of democracy to improve his international image. (See IV No 59). A. Even before the assassination, the regime was already in need of a political exercise that would improve its image internationally. The election of the regular parliament was one way Marcos tried to prove that there is a workable democracy in this country. Because of the demands of the opposition and of the people who are protesting the undemocratic way the government has been running affairs, Marcos was pressured into granting some electoral reforms.
With the aid of the National Movement for Free Elections (NAMFREL), the businessmen, and the Bishops' Conference, they were able to get some improvement in the rules by may be a way out of this undemocratic government. But Marcos intran- US sigently holds on to Amendment Six, which authorizes him to make US decrees and override parliamentary an decisions, including on questions of are budget allocations. So it's becoming wł very apparent that the Batasan op [parliament] voting might have been de a useless exercise from the point of sar view of effectively eroding or doing en away with the dictatorial authority po of Marcos. de
Of course, - grant that the Batasan pe can be a sounding board for the people's sentiments. But in terms of th achieving significant changes in the tio government, there's very little chance we through parliament. on ba
Q. What do you see as the main ma program of reforms needed in the be Philippines today? th
A. What the parliament of the streets' has been calling for is the destruction of the dictatorship. But SUL this is tied up completely with the Fr economic strangulation of the Philip- wh
One month after the death of Ageno -BAN
USTICE F OR ALL U. ЗНР
International Viewpoint 16 September 1985
pines by foreign interests.
The political and economic change must be achieved in tandem, although the key is the dismantling or removal of the Marcos dictatorship and its replacement with a government that would be representative of the various sectors of society. Some, like Jose Diokno and Lorenzo Tanada [opposition political figures], call this a coalition government. Basically I support this kind of transition government.
Q. How united are the anti-Marcos forces today?
A. Well, compared with the period before the assassination of Aquino they are more united. But there remain some cleavages within the ranks of the opposition, in particular arguments about how to achieve change, though I think this could be ironed out through earnest dialogue among all the opposition forces.
Q. What are the options for the US gövernment in the Philippines?
A. From the statements of the US State Department and the US ambassador to the Philippines, they are still opting for a unification of what they call the "democratic opposition." When I talk about the democratic opposition, it is not the same terminology as the American embassy. They mean the traditional politicians. When we talk about the democratic opposition we mean the people's organizations.
In the case of the United States, they are trying to tie up all the traditional opposition groups and drive a wedge between the left and the traditional opposition. They know there is a basic influence of the left within the mass movement. Whether they will be able to build an opposition minus the left remains to be seen.
Q. How would you assess the support for the National Democratic Front (NDF) opposition bloc in which the New People's Army (NPA) o - the people demonstrate (DR)
WAMASAD ANG NA PAGHI JUSTICE F POLITICAL RARISAN ACTOGY GRADS MUSLIMS
BEAT
LFT and the CPP participate?
A. The NDF is better known internationally than it is here. Here the people identify more with the
New People's Army, which is a component of the NDF. As an idea, the
NDF is very acceptable, even to some sections of the middle forces.
The government accepts that there has been an expansion in both the number of fighters and the strength of armaments of the NPA, although it tries to play this down by saying that the situation is not as serious as 1972, which is not accurate.
Q. What is the effect of the militarization of the countryside by the army, the hamletting of peasant communities, and so on?
A. There are extensive military abuses, particularly "salvaging,"
hamletting, torture, etc. These activities are helping to politicize the people, driving them against the Marcos government. The only alternative open to them is the NPA, because it is the one most responsive to their basic problems and grievances. However much the government tries to counter the NPA, they Will never be successful in their "civic action" programs and counterinsurgency campaigns.
Q. The NPA is said to organize its own local government administration in some areas. Would you describe these as similar to the liberated zones in El Salvador?
A. As far as the level of armed struggle in the Philippines is concerned, there has not been any claim yet of liberated zones. But they are classified as guerrilla zones, that is, guerrilla bases that are relatively advanced. These bases, when consolidated, would get to the level of liberated zones.
But even in the guerrilla zones there is already the infrastructure of a government in the villages, the Barangays [village councils]. In some areas it is the government structure itself which is utilized; in others it is an alternative form.
As the area of the armed struggle by the NPA expands, the villages are consolidated into self-governing units with their own defense, health, education, and administration.
Q. Could you tell me something about your case?
A. In the "rebellion" case, it is my contention that I should not be accused because rebellion entails taking up arms against the government. The crime I am alleged to have committed was at a time when I was working as a journalist, that is in 1972. So I could not have been a participant in the armed struggle.
Q. You have been charged with organizing the import of arms from a
"foreign power," presumably the
People's Republic of China, in this rebellion case.
A. In the case of "subversion"
and "rebellion," they want to prove that I am a member of the Central
Committee of the Communist Party of the Philippines and by implication share responsibility for the arms smuggling.
I deny both accusations, and it is up to the military prosecution to prove that I am a member of the
Central Committee and that I am responsible or partially responsible for the bringing in of arms.
Is it true that Jose Maria
Sison has not denied that he is the chairman of the CPP?
A. He has a statement which he signed in which he says he was chairman of the CPP. In my case I have refused to sign such a statement, knowing it would be used against me in the trials.
Q. When I spoke to the military's prosecuting lawyers, I asked them about the use of torture to exact confessions. They denied this, of course. Could you explain your own case?
A. The documentation of my torture has been submitted to Amnesty International and has also been well- publicized by the Task Force Detainees. In 1978 an investigation was ordered after my complaints of torture. But nothing happened because there were no witnesses to corroborate my contentions. But of course there are never witnesses to torture. It's all on their side.
Q. What have been your conditions during your eight and a half years' imprisonment?
A. For the first nine months after my arrest I was in solitary confinement. Then for five months in 1980 and 1981 I was put in solitary again because I was accused of leading a hunger strike of the detainees.
Q. Do you think the hunger strike tactic was effective?
A. Up to 1981 it was effective. The best hunger strike we had was in November-December 1980 when 133 of us went on strike. About 100 of these won their release.
But after that we haven't been able to win many concessions with hunger strikes. So last year we changed our tactics. Instead of the prisoners alone going on hunger strikes, the relatives and friends went on hunger strike outside. But even that did not move Marcos into releasing most of us.
International Viewpoint 16 September 1985
SWEDEN